2 ms·
gcc is a complex beast and optimisation is hard. There's no such such thing as "generic optimisations" that remove useless actions, because depending on the har
by qayxc 4y ago
gcc is a complex beast and optimisation is hard. There's no such such thing as "generic optimisations" that remove useless actions, because depending on the hardware, certain seemingly useless actions are actually required to make correctness guarantees. Without access to the offending source code, one can only speculate what actually led to this result.
Another problem is simply that there's probably only a handful of people, likely employed by a single company or two, who maintain the parts for this specific architecture. It's very likely that there are too few users who actually report this kind of issues and too few resources available to test and address them.
It's not an issue with gcc or its optimiser in general.
- 3836293648 4y agoAh. I thought GCC was more similar to LLVM in that aspect, which definitely has a generic optimiser, though different users of the library enable different ones