This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Inlining (was: GCC 3.3 release criteria)

From: Andi Kleen <ak at suse dot de>
To: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>,Andi Kleen <ak at suse dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:50:10 +0100
Subject: Re: Inlining (was: GCC 3.3 release criteria)
References: <m3hear6yzj.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net> <90BEC760-49D3-11D7-8BFB-00039390D9E0@apple.com>

> >But then if -fobey-inline doesn't error then there is something about 
> >it?
> >
> >Matt, what does happen when a function can't be inlined?
> 
> Nothing special.  It inlines the function if possible; if not (e.g. if 
> it's a
> recursive call), then it just silently doesn't do the inlining.

That's exactly the semantics I want too. It would be nice if your patch
could be put into gcc 3.3

-Andi

References:
- Re: Inlining (was: GCC 3.3 release criteria)
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: Inlining (was: GCC 3.3 release criteria)
  - From: Matt Austern

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]