public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: bangerth@dealii.org
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, martin@xemacs.org,
	nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c++/8936: Declaration of never defined member function changes generated code
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 17:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021220010349.27582.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

Synopsis: Declaration of never defined member function changes generated code

State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Thu Dec 19 17:03:48 2002
State-Changed-Why:
    I can confirm this, and it happens with all versions of
    gcc up to the present mainline after the BIB merge.
    
    The effect can be traced back to the case with no 
    optimizations switched on. There, in foo we have at
    the beginning
    	subl	$24, %esp
    where we have at the beginning of bar:
    	subl	$72, %esp
    Otherwise the code is identical (apart from the obvious
    changes in addressing local variables relative to ebp).
    
    Why so much stack space is allocated remains a mystery to
    me, but since the difference in stack allocation is the
    only thing that remains constant the more optimizations
    we switch on, this would indeed be interesting to
    investigate.
    
    The existence of a copy constructor (that is indeed not
    used here) changes something in data structures that
    should not even be used here. I thought a moment about
    exception handling, but declaring the copy constructor
    with throw() does not change anything.
    
    I don't think I can be of further help, but this would be
    something well worth fixing!
    
    W.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8936


             reply	other threads:[~2002-12-20  1:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-12-19 17:03 bangerth [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-14  2:56 martin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20021220010349.27582.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=bangerth@dealii.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=martin@xemacs.org \
    --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).