Re: [Patch] (Partial) fix for libstdc++/14078

[Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>]

Pétur Runólfsson wrote:

> Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> > Better results, working around deficiencies of the current inliner
> > (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-02/msg00302.html) could be
> > obtained by adding const qualifiers to the signatures.
>
> But a top level const qualifier on a formal parameter is *not* part
> of the signature, see 13.1. The only effect it has is to make the
> parameter const within the function body. In other words, it's
> equivalent to declaring a local variable const.

Pétur, you don't need to explain that again. I know that technically we
could add those 'const' here and there in order to help the defects of
the current inliner.

Still, all of this will become very soon redundant, since the tree-ssa
(aka 3.5) already has those problems fixed and it would be the first time
that we do that kind of fiddling.

As you may have noticed we do our best not to add hacks and workarounds
in the library, which is meant as a long term project, humbly a "reference
implementation", not something which must perform better at any cost than
a non-existant competitor (since in formatted output of integers, on x86
at least, this is the current situation ;)

Paolo.