From xemacs-m  Tue Apr  1 13:56:43 1997
Received: from venus.Sun.COM (venus.Sun.COM [192.9.25.5])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA20221
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 13:56:42 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM ([129.146.1.25]) by venus.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/mail.byaddr) with SMTP id LAA08325; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 11:56:11 -0800
Received: from kindra.eng.sun.com by Eng.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/SMI-5.3)
	id LAA09931; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 11:56:08 -0800
Received: from xemacs.eng.sun.com by kindra.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id LAA01929; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 11:56:09 -0800
Received: by xemacs.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id LAA00192; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 11:56:05 -0800
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 11:56:05 -0800
Message-Id: <199704011956.LAA00192@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Buchholz <mrb@Eng.Sun.COM>
To: <julian@fsdirect.com>
Cc: XEmacs Beta Test <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Optimization flags in XEmacs Sun binary kit
In-Reply-To: <Roam.SIMC.2.0.Beta.859849359.6505.julian@fsdirect.com>
References: <Roam.SIMC.2.0.Beta.859849359.6505.julian@fsdirect.com>
Reply-To: Martin Buchholz <mrb@Eng.Sun.COM>

>>>>> "J" == julian  <julian@fsdirect.com> writes:

J> 	Just wondering, is it a reason that you use -xO3 in Solaris (intel) but -xO4
J> in Solaris (sparc)? Is it -XO4 in intel give bad code? 

There is a reason, but I can't remember what it was.

The compiler backends have different origins, which is not surprising.

I just tried building with -xO4, and a minute's worth of testing
revealed no problems.  I will build future binaries with -xO4 and the
latest DevPro cc.

J> P.S. Another reason I ask is beacuse I am going to built XEmacs 19.15 with CDE
J>      suport for Intel (may be Sparc too).

If you have the latest DevPro products, then -xO4 should work for you.

As always, lower optimization levels are more reliable, and slower.

Martin

