Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 08:55:30 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Rotes Sapiens <rs AT redplanet DOT mars DOT org DOT cy>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: THE -O2 PROBLEM
In-Reply-To: <390b89b1.9812591@news.cobweb.com.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000430085358.27839C-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Rotes Sapiens wrote:

> I have another suggestion, perhaps it is a good idea not to optimise
> asm at all?

The issue that was discussed involved a C source with inline assembly 
fragments.  There's never a good reason not to optimize a C source.

When compiling a pure asembly source, the -O option is a no-op (AFAIK).