From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24378 invoked by alias); 8 Mar 2003 06:11:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24358 invoked by uid 48); 8 Mar 2003 06:11:52 -0000 Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 06:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030308061152.24357.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, rth@redhat.com From: bangerth@dealii.org Reply-To: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, rth@redhat.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: middle-end/9997: Coelesce stack slots for disjoint scopes. X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00378.txt.bz2 List-Id: Synopsis: Coelesce stack slots for disjoint scopes. State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: bangerth State-Changed-When: Sat Mar 8 06:11:52 2003 State-Changed-Why: Confirmed. I think it is a usual observation that gcc often allocates far too much stack space, which often enough isn't even used -- see, for example, PRs 8935 and 8936 (in particular the latter, without optimizations). W. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9997