std::pow implementation

[Robert Dewar]

> I haven't chosen anything, I just quoted the C Standard.  It clearly
> calls for compiler's effort towards fast execution over inline
> substitution.  Compared with that, what you claim to be C++'s intended
> meaning (inline even if the resulting code is worse) seems as a very
> misguided idea.

In fact in a language standard, you really can't define the notion of
"inlining" as such, since the standard is not in the business of
describing details about the generated code. So the formal meaning of
inline is most certainly "speed up execution of this function if possible
at the expense of extra space". Yes, notes in the standard and the name
chosen for this hint is strongly evocative, but not normative :-)