This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: std::pow implementation
Op wo 30-07-2003, om 17:28 schreef Scott Robert Ladd:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > Therefore, inline the way you describe it, is useful only for
> > functions that are *always* profitable to inline. Any function that
> > might or might not be profitable to inline should not be declared
> > inline, and the compiler would never inline it. This sounds silly to
> > me. Why not let the user tell the compiler `hey, look, this
> > function is probably worth trying to inline', but letting the
> > compiler decide whether it's actually profitable or not, depending
> > not only on the context, but also on machine-dependent features?
>
> IMNSHO, the keyword "inline" means precisely what it says: to inline the
> code for a given function, if possible.
Richard Guenther's experience with this meaning for "inline" are not
that positive: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-07/msg02140.html.
And then he's the guy who always wants more inlining :-p
Gr.
Steven