From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-93678-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 2687 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2004 09:44:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 2678 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2004 09:44:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.58)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Mar 2004 09:44:00 -0000
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (pc960.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.205.4])
	by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2V9hx9I013451;
	Wed, 31 Mar 2004 10:43:59 +0100 (BST)
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2V9hwvv013587;
	Wed, 31 Mar 2004 10:43:59 +0100
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (rearnsha@localhost)
	by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id i2V9hwZB013582;
	Wed, 31 Mar 2004 10:43:58 +0100
Message-Id: <200403310943.i2V9hwZB013582@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
To: Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com>
cc: xyzzy@hotpop.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
Reply-To: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
Organization: ARM Ltd.
X-Telephone: +44 1223 400569 (direct+voicemail), +44 1223 400400 (switchbd)
X-Fax: +44 1223 400410
X-Address: ARM Ltd., 110 Fulbourn Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge CB1 9NJ.
X-Url: http://www.arm.com/
Subject: Re: Backend port: Minimizing register usage in favor of memory 
 accesses
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:31:51 -0800."
             <4069D937.9000507@specifixinc.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 12:53:00 -0000
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01759.txt.bz2


> The goal of an optimizing compiler is to produce the fastest code for 
> the target.

Not necessarily.  The goal of an optimizing compiler is to minimize some 
cost metric.  Sometimes that cost metric is the same as 'target execution 
time' at other times it is something else, such as 'code size'.  Many of 
the specific optimizations performed will be same regardless of the 
overall cost metric being worked on; but not always.

R.