From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28768 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2003 22:45:11 -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 28755 invoked by uid 48); 29 Jul 2003 22:45:10 -0000 Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 22:45:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030729224510.28754.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: 2003-07/txt/msg03502.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 ------- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-29 22:45 ------- Oh really......... veeeeery interesting. This may make a substantial difference in libstdc++ runtime performance. Can all of libstdc++ and the libstdc++ testsuite be run with this flag? -benjamin