From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26577 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2003 17:55:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26563 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jun 2003 17:55:12 -0000 Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 17:55:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030628175512.26560.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030220055600.9767.bkoz@redhat.com> References: <20030220055600.9767.bkoz@redhat.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug optimization/9767] explicit instantiation of class members unoptimized? X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg03018.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9767 bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jh at suse dot cz ------- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-06-28 17:55 ------- Jan, I'm curious: can you see if C++ unit-at-a-time solves this bug? If so, that would be really excellent: this is probably a 5-10% runtime hit. thanks, benjamin