From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-89328-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15417 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 14:16:11 -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 15394 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 14:16:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 14:16:10 -0000
Received: from gnat.com (ppp1.gnat.com [205.232.38.211])
	by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CD36DF2DAD; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 09:16:07 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <400BE6A9.9070806@gnat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:16:00 -0000
From: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Cc: ian@wasabisystems.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Can we speed up the gcc_target structure?
References: <10401191153.AA27414@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <10401191153.AA27414@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01283.txt.bz2

Richard Kenner wrote:

> My sense would be to revert these changes and eliminate the target stucture
> in favor of the simpler macro approach.

Well certainly it would be useful to have precise measurements of the
impact. Closer to home (if home is GNAT) debug.ads/adb do not make the
debug flags constant in GNAT, so that they can be changed with -gnatd?
and as far as I know we never measured the impact of this similar kind
of issue -- we should :-)

Certain of the GNAT -gnatd switches are user important (like -gnatdO 
probably), but most are not.