Hi! On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Jonathan Brandmeyer wrote: [...]
Only grudginly so. But if this turns out to work and there *really* is no other way on that platform, then possibly.
I'll ask on the binutils list to see if there is a workaround.
That effort would be highly appreciated.
Besides, if Mr. Haible needed those functions inline for performance, than isn't the fact that they are not being inlined, even on Linux, a bug in its own right?
Errr, yes, but... Wait, that's a good piece of sophistic dialectics! *If* he needed those functions inline for performance, *then* it would be a bug. But since you never actually *need* something for performance but rather just *long* for it. I would say that it would be a (less severe) optimization issue. \end{nitpick} What are those functions that aren't being inlined, even on Linux? I just checked the most obvious candidates by browsing the generated assembler and they all appear inlined on my compilation using GCC-3.3.2 with "-O2 -fno-exceptions". Let me also point out that the fact whether any function ends up being inlined or not highly depends on how CXXFLAGS are set. Namely the flags -finline-limit=<n> --param max-inline-insns-single=<m1> --param max-inline-insns-auto=<m2> --param max-inline-insns-rtl=<m3> do have a significant effect, independent of the platform. So, on your platform, the success of the whole compilation depends on such tunable compiler parameters? If that would be true it would be quite unfortunate. Cheers -richy. -- Richard B. Kreckel <Richard.Kreckel@GiNaC.DE> <http://www.ginac.de/~kreckel/>