Talk:Object code optimizer

This article does not seem accurate due to the fact that most of the later mentioned implementations performed inter procedural or whole program optimizations as opposed to being limited to peephole optimizations. To characterize the two as basically similar in scope and complexity does not seem correct.

Proposed overhaul and expansion

I am proposing an update to this page to address its limited scope and the flagged concerns. This includes expanding on existing examples with more details from reliable sources.

Please provide feedback on the proposed draft here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:WikiScribeRef/sandbox/Object_code_optimizer

In reviewing the research papers for the examples in the current version, the term "Object Code Optimizer" is rarely if ever used. "Binary optimizer" is the standard term in modern literature (e.g., in papers on BOLT and DynamoRIO). While this draft keeps the current title, I suggest discussing a rename to "Binary Optimizer" in a separate update, per WP:COMMONNAME.

Beyond expanding the identified examples, I've added Adore and Propeller as they are noteworthy contributions. I've removed QuaC (never fully implemented, only an informal discussion) and "Design and Engineering of a Dynamic Binary Optimizer" (a general paper on techniques, not a specific tool example).

If no objections in the next week, I'll implement this in the main article. Thanks for your input!

WikiScribeRef (talk) 21:29, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

I've now implemented the proposed changes to the main article. Further feedback welcome! WikiScribeRef (talk) 20:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)