This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: std::pow implementation
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>
- To: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Cc: aoliva at redhat dot com, bernds at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gdr at integrable-solutions dot net, rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de, s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl
- Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 10:34:49 -0700
- Subject: Re: std::pow implementation
- References: <20030804172640.AB3C6F2D85@nile.gnat.com>
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 01:26:40PM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
> > Sigh. In C++, the programmer has already done the needed analysis, and
> > has attached the keyword "inline" or defined the function in the class
> > body. Certainly, with -O3 the kind of analysis you describe would be
> > appropriate, though possibly expensive.
> This claim is made repeatedly, but without any evidence.
OK, so let's gather some evidence now.