[Bug middle-end/21628] GCC much slower than ICL. Lack of inlining?

["laurent at ient dot rwth-aachen dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #7 from laurent at ient dot rwth-aachen dot de  2008-09-27 11:40 -------
Hello

I reopen the discussion because I noticed a problem in relation with
"__attribute__((__always_inline__))" when I tried to compile my library as a
DLL.

GCC now forces inlines well, and is now as quick as ICL for my generic
implementation of the FFT Fast Fourier Transform).
So I would like to progressively use GCC as my favorite compiler.

GCC works fine if I use "inline" as usual (but my program is slow).
But I get hundreds error messages if I use the macro "#define inline
__attribute__((__always_inline__))". For example:

obj\Release\src\copy.o:copy.cpp:(.text+0x0): first defined here
obj\Release\src\dct.o:dct.cpp:(.text+0xe): multiple definition of `_ferror'
obj\Release\src\copy.o:copy.cpp:(.text+0xe): first defined here
obj\Release\src\dct.o:dct.cpp:(.text+0x1c): multiple definition of `operator
new(unsigned int, void*)'
obj\Release\src\copy.o:copy.cpp:(.text+0x1c): first defined here

I use the CodeBlock Environnement and MinGW GCC 4.3.1 (downloaded from
http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/)
My problem might be related with the following bug report:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37121

Any Clue????

--------------------------------
I was asked above from Paolo if I could give a test case where ICL is quicker
than GCC. I will publish the new version 2.2 of my library in a couple of days
(http://www.ient.rwth-aachen.de/~laurent/genial/genial.html).
If you are still interested, I could give then a small test case using my
library where ICL is much quicker than GCC and VC2008 (but I don't care much
about VC2008).


-- 

laurent at ient dot rwth-aachen dot de changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21628