This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc and inlining
- From: Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>
- To: Stuart Hastings <stuart at apple dot com>
- Cc: Matt Austern <austern at apple dot com>, Ron Price <ronp at apple dot com>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 12:59:02 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: gcc and inlining
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Richard Guenther wrote:
> [from private discussion about the -fobey-inline patch by Stuart Hastings]
>
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Stuart Hastings wrote:
>
> > On Friday, Mar 7, 2003, at 14:39 US/Pacific, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, some tests show no difference in generated code with/without
> > > -fobey-inline and the .s files still show calls to methods marked
> > > inline.
> > > So I suspect somehow this machinery doesnt work for methods of C++
> > > template classes (at least).
> > >
> > > Any idea?
After some more look I suspect it would be more "correct" (and easy) to
just set the always_inline attribute at C/ObjC/C++ parsing time if
flag_obey_inline is set?
This way there is no bad iteraction with -fdefault-inline and it really
only does obey to the inline keyword (if always_inline implementation is
correct, at least).
Thoughts?
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at uni-tuebingen dot de>
WWW: http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de/~rguenth/