This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: std::pow implementation
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Cc: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 30 Jul 2003 19:31:58 +0200
- Subject: Re: std::pow implementation
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <200307301724.h6UHOq021527@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
Richard Earnshaw <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| If the original C specification had said that "register" meant "register"
| unconditionally, then the situation wouldn't have been any different --
| the compiler would have to obey the user, even if the compiler could do
| better. The same is also conceptually true with inline; if its meaning
| becomes "you, the compiler, have no choice in this decision" then it
| doesn't matter how smart the compiler can become it still has to obey the
| directive. This, IMO, is clearly incompatible with the intent of inline,
| even as Stroustrup originally intended it.
The point of disagreement is that from "The same is also conceptually
true with inline", the compiler is jumping to "the same is also
practically true with inline" without even reaching that level of
sophistication. If the compiler reaches that level, I'm pretty sure
Stroustrup will agree with you :-) But till then....