On inlining in C++ with unit-at-a-time code

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Concerning the inlining limits, I believe we should increase them.

Sure, your analysis seems convincing...

> Situation seems to be the same for C++ programs I tested too (your
> benchmark suite and similar).

...and if someone else has conflicting test results, we can always
consider these later.

> For functions marked explicitely as inline I would like the limit to
> see even higher limit if C++ programming style allows us to do, this
> needs more testing, but I think the values around 500 would be OK.

In the light of recent discussion on this list, this seems like a
good idea.

> I hope we can enable unit-at-a-time at -O2 by default and solve the
> problem in easy way.  In SuSE we are experimentally building the
> distribution with it and now all problems directly attributable to
> unit-at-a-time seems to be gone.

Well, if you can build an entire distribution without problems, that
certainly looks good enough.

> With this settings I believe we should be able to quite consistently
> outperform the old inlining heuiristics of 2.95 both compile time-memory
> wise and code quality wise.

Cool. Really.

Gerald