I see this a lot shouldn't O3 produce better optimizations?
Is that people have large codebases? OR is it that O3 does some CPU/memory tradeoffs? OR something else?
with out RTFA -O3 is where a lot of the weird compiler deciding it's smarter than you optimizations come in, and most of the time it is smarter than you and sometimes it introduces weird behavior.
ALSO it generally produces a larger binary which means less of it fits in the cache. I know a while back it was often suggested to try O3 and OS because often OS ended up being faster.
Hi, I'm the author of the pull request. The pull request got stuck due to an issue with dynamic injection of local variables into view templates. (Explained more in the Aaron Patterson's RailsConf keynote[1]). We were planning to solve this issue before (potentially) merging the feature.
At the moment, it looks like the issue is solvable, and I have code that seems to solve it but still needs some refinement before I can submit a pull request about it.
I don't know what the Rails core team is planning about the feature, but considering how complex the whole thing is and how much there's still left to do, I'd guess that it won't make it to 5.0.
I see that it's an issue.
But the places you use locals in a template is small. Majority of the templates would still benefit. Like the main layout and so on.
I see this a lot shouldn't O3 produce better optimizations? Is that people have large codebases? OR is it that O3 does some CPU/memory tradeoffs? OR something else?