Re: __builtin_expect for indirect function calls

[rridge at csclub dot uwaterloo dot ca (Ross Ridge)]

Mark Mitchell writes:
> What do people think?  Do we have the leeway to change this?

If it were just cases where using __builtin_expect is pointless that
would break, like function overloading and sizeof then I don't think
it would be a problem.  However, it would change behaviour when C++
conversion operators are used and I can see these being legitimately
used with __builtin_expect.  Something like:

	struct C {
		operator long();
	};

	int foo() {
		if (__builtin_expect(C(), 0))
			return 1;
		return 2;
	}

If cases like these are rare enough it's probably an acceptable change
if they give an error because the argument types don't match.

					Ross Ridge