4 ms·
As far as I'm aware, the author was using optimizations in quotes ("optimizations") to parallel the previously defined C* and "C" distinctions. Hence why sectio
by iherbig 11y ago
As far as I'm aware, the author was using optimizations in quotes ("optimizations") to parallel the previously defined C* and "C" distinctions. Hence why section 2.1 is called 'Optimization* and "Optimization".' He's not suggesting they are not real optimizations, but that they are a class of optimizations which target the "C" subset rather than the C* superset.
At least, that was my understanding of it. People seem to be reading into the quotes as indicative of tone rather than notation, so I wanted to put a different perspective out there.
- AntonErtl 11y agoThank you for the interest in this paper. You read one intention of the quotes right. But they are also intended to be scare quotes; if the result of an "optimization" is equivalent to the behaviour intended by the programmer that also worked with earlier versions of the compiler, it's a real optimization, if not, it's miscompilation. E.g., "optimizing" a bounded loop into an endless loop is not a real optimization.