This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: std::pow implementation
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Martin Reinecke <martin at MPA-Garching dot MPG dot DE>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 30 Jul 2003 15:05:52 +0200
- Subject: Re: std::pow implementation
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <3F27BD38.8020009@mpa-garching.mpg.de>
Martin Reinecke <martin@MPA-Garching.MPG.DE> writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
|
| > Do trust the programmer.
|
| This is certainly a valid point of view, but I think that C++, as it exists
| at the moment, just _doesn't give_ the programmer the possibility of specifying
| what exactly (s)he wants.
But taking out the only lever the programmer currently has is even far
worse.
| I think it is not generally possible for a programmer to decide
| whether a function should be inlined or not (see below).
I reckon that there are conner cases that "inline" does not cover.
But, I'm worrying about the common situations -- and those that ave
been subject of PRs.
However, in lieu of pragmas, I will point out that current C++
gives the programmer means to express, in many corner cases, the
intention of not inlining, by combining inline and noninline
definitions and object functions.
[...]
| Of course it would be much nicer if C++ supported this natively ...
|
| Please ignore me if I didn't make any sense.
Your input is meaningful, I don't see why it should be ignored :-)
-- Gaby