Jump to content

Talk:Binary optimizer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

Proposed rename to "Binary optimizer"

[edit]

In a follow up to my previous suggestion, I propose renaming this article from "Object code optimizer" to "Binary optimizer," as the latter is the more commonly used and contemporary term in computer science literature and industry practice. This aligns with Wikipedia's naming convention to use the most recognizable name (WP:COMMONNAME).

Reasons and evidence

[edit]

A review of the content shows that the majority of examples and references employ "binary optimizer" or closely related terms like "dynamic binary optimizer," reflecting modern usage. Some examples from this article include:

-IBM's Automatic Binary Optimizer for z/OS

-BOLT: Binary Optimization and Layout Tool

-COBRA, an adaptive runtime binary optimization framework for multithreaded applications on Itanium

-Dynimize, a dynamic binary optimizer for x86-64 on Linux

-Solaris Binary Optimizer

In contrast, "object code optimizer" seems to only appear in the description of the mid-1970s COBOL Optimizer developed by Capex Corporation.

For this reason, I suggest retaining "Object code optimizer" as a redirect and noting it as an alternative/historical term in the lead for completeness.

What do others think? WikiScribeRef (talk) 20:08, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Proceeded with rename as proposed, with no objections received. Further discussion welcome! WikiScribeRef (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Binary_optimizer&oldid=1340773378"