This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: [Patch] libstdc++/25288

From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
To: Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple dot com>
Cc: libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 22:52:50 +0100
Subject: Re: [Patch] libstdc++/25288
References: <43988184.9000408@suse.de> <7B47F93B-DCF2-49EC-8890-85765B7C1713@apple.com>

Hi Howard,

> I'm not positive about my suggested replacement, but your proposed 
> replacement is definitely too big to inline.  Even my suggestion may 
> be too big to inline.  You might try disassembling it on your 
> favorite platform and counting (optimized but outlined) 
> instructions.  If there's much more than a dozen, I'd be tempted to 
> outline it.  That result may depend on whether the constructor and 
> splice should be outlined or not.

First, I will answer this point: simply, I didn't notice that the
existing functions I was patching were inline! I agree with you completely.

Paolo.

References:
- [Patch] libstdc++/25288
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: [Patch] libstdc++/25288
  - From: Howard Hinnant

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