Jay Collins wrote in a message to Ed Blackman:

 > Replace "-ox" with "-otexan", which, of course,
is short for "-ot
 > -oe -ox -oa -on".  And it doesn't really make a difference what
 > order you specify the options in, "texan" is just easier to
 > remember, than, say "xntae".  Note that this optimizes for _speed_,
 > not size.

 JC> What switches would be best for SIZE then?

Of the above, "-ot" favors time over size, so replace it with
"-os" instead.

Of the rest, only "-oe" causes code expansion, so omit it.

Alias checks (eliminated by "-oa"), stack checks (eliminated by
"-ox"), and IEEE-754 compliant divisions (eliminated by
"-on") would increase both execution time and size.

Therefore, "-osxan" would optimize for size.

Remember that, regardless of anything else, "-oa" can cause
incorrect code to be generated if the programmer modifies a global via
alias.
 
-- Mike


---