From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>, "Laurynas Biveinis" <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
Cc: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: gcc-3.0 related patches for DJGPP CVS version
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 13:07:29 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDIAEOICCAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010429095037.26520H-100000@is>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> > Of course in this case these switches should go into specs too.
> 
> Not necessarily: building a library could involve considerations which 
> don't apply to applications on a Joe Random User's machine.
> 
Don't the -march and or -mcpu switches affect alignment? Seems to me that
the choice of what alignment is best is closely tied to the architecture
and/or CPU you're generating code for.
As such, it shouldn't be necessary to explicitly specify alignment unless
you have specific needs.