Path: utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!bmers58!!hwt
From: hwt@.uucp (Henry Troup)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: Possible HP-UX compiler optimizer bug (found while making Perl)
Message-ID: <530@bmers58.UUCP>
Date: 20 Nov 89 16:56:03 GMT
References: <4413@fmeed1.UUCP> <7370029@hpfcso.HP.COM>
Sender: news@bmers58.UUCP
Reply-To: bnr-fos!hwt%bmerh490
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 22
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:

In article <7370029@hpfcso.HP.COM> mjs@hpfcso.HP.COM (Marc Sabatella) writes:
>Don't blame the peephole optimizer, the global optimizer invoked by -O is an
>entirely new product for 6.5
>
>And yes, there are known bugs, which have been fixed for 7.0.
>
>But it is not so bad (at 6.5) that you should should always use +O1.

I'd beg to differ... an optimizer (level) known to be bad is not something
I want to mess with.  The creation of undebuggable failures is less than 
pleasant.
 
We found out about this optimizer when one compile looped forever - as the 
code being compiled was another company's very proprietary product (the 
representative of that company brought the source tape, supervised loading,
we tried it, sealed the tape and sent it to the vault) - I could not usefully
report this.
 
Anyway, can you say 'beta test' ?

Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
..utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!hwt%bmerh490 or  HWT@BNR.CA