3 ms·
Neither of those work in general. W.r.t. 1, the compiler's definition of no optimization today is not the same thing as it was last version, or will be next ve
by TheLoneWolfling 11y ago
Neither of those work in general.
W.r.t. 1, the compiler's definition of no optimization today is not the same thing as it was last version, or will be next version. For instance, on IA-64 there are things the compiler has to do that are typically considered optimizations.
W.r.t. 2, you have to make sure there is no link-time optimization happening.
- epsylon 11y agoYou could also dynamically link.
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoThat does not solve the problem. That only hides it and means it will be deadly later. For instance, when someone runs it in an emulator for backwards compatibility purposes. Or when someone runs it in a JITter. Or even just if the compiler decides to special-case for the existing link target.
- mpu 11y agoLto does not work on assembly, it only works if some IR is stored in the .o files (like gimple for gcc) iirc.
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoCurrently. However, that is not an inherent restriction - that is only a restriction on current compilers. It is entirely possible for a compiler to read the assembly of things being linked and optimize based on that.