deadcode optimization

"Elie Khoury" <khoury@club-internet.fr>
1 Mar 2001 02:37:20 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
deadcode optimization khoury@club-internet.fr (Elie Khoury) (2001-03-01)
Re: deadcode optimization fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (2001-03-01)
Re: deadcode optimization broeker@physik.rwth-aachen.de (Hans-Bernhard Broeker) (2001-03-01)
Re: deadcode optimization Bjorn.DeSutter@rug.ac.be (Bjorn De Sutter) (2001-03-01)
Re: deadcode optimization guerby@acm.org (Laurent Guerby) (2001-03-01)
Re: deadcode optimization stonybrk@fubar.com (Norman Black) (2001-03-04)
Re: deadcode optimization fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (2001-03-08)
[12 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Elie Khoury" <khoury@club-internet.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 1 Mar 2001 02:37:20 -0500
Organization: Club-Internet (France)
Keywords: linker, question
Posted-Date: 01 Mar 2001 02:37:20 EST

heLlo,


Is there a way to improve "deadcode removal" = the way the linker
removes unreferenced functions, in order to have smaller executables ?
I noticed gcc is very bad with this operation. Should I help him by
preprocessing, or is there any hints to perform a good cleaning ? we
suppose we don't "play" with functions pointers thanks for help khoury
[Some linkers do a better job than others. The AIX linker, for example,
is quite good. -John]






Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.