From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8761 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2003 19:38:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8751 invoked by uid 48); 17 Aug 2003 19:38:13 -0000 Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 19:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030817193813.8750.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030204102600.9566.osv@javad.ru> References: <20030204102600.9566.osv@javad.ru> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug optimization/9566] Inline function produces much worse code than manual inlining. X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg01869.txt.bz2 List-Id: PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9566 pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement