From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
To: "Steve Snyder" <ssnyder@indy.net>
Cc: "EGCS Mailing List" <egcs@cygnus.com>,
"PGCC Mailing List" <pgcc@delorie.com>
Subject: Re: Questions on inlining of code
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 09:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16550.921776623@hurl.cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 18 Mar 1999 10:29:24 MST. < 199903181530.KAA01307@indy3.indy.net >
In message < 199903181530.KAA01307@indy3.indy.net >you write:
> Two question on inlining of code in egcs/pgcc:
>
> 1. Is it possible to disable automatic inlining (compiler switches -O3 or
> -finline) while still respecting the inline declaration in the source code?
> I'd like to compile with max optimization (-O6) while avoiding the bloat
> that comes with aggressive inlining of code. At the same time, though, I
> don't want to disabled the inlining of code explicitly declared as such.
The only difference between -O2 and -On for n > 2 is automatic function
inlining. So, just use -O2.
> 2. Does aggressive inlining of code make any sense on a Pentium+ CPU?
Maybe. Depends on the precise situation.
jeff
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
To: "Steve Snyder" <ssnyder@indy.net>
Cc: "EGCS Mailing List" <egcs@cygnus.com>,
"PGCC Mailing List" <pgcc@delorie.com>
Subject: Re: Questions on inlining of code
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 23:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16550.921776623@hurl.cygnus.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <19990331234600.AItGflFHqMfCOpRs7z11nGzQKF8cx5YCB22Q67huMuU@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <199903181530.KAA01307@indy3.indy.net>
In message < 199903181530.KAA01307@indy3.indy.net >you write:
> Two question on inlining of code in egcs/pgcc:
>
> 1. Is it possible to disable automatic inlining (compiler switches -O3 or
> -finline) while still respecting the inline declaration in the source code?
> I'd like to compile with max optimization (-O6) while avoiding the bloat
> that comes with aggressive inlining of code. At the same time, though, I
> don't want to disabled the inlining of code explicitly declared as such.
The only difference between -O2 and -On for n > 2 is automatic function
inlining. So, just use -O2.
> 2. Does aggressive inlining of code make any sense on a Pentium+ CPU?
Maybe. Depends on the precise situation.
jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-03-18 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-03-18 7:29 Steve Snyder
[not found] ` < 199903181530.KAA01307@indy3.indy.net >
1999-03-18 9:04 ` Jeffrey A Law [this message]
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Jeffrey A Law
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Steve Snyder
[not found] <199903181530.KAA01307.cygnus.egcs@indy3.indy.net>
1999-03-18 8:33 ` Jason Merrill
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Jason Merrill
1999-03-18 17:44 N8TM
1999-03-31 23:46 ` N8TM
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16550.921776623@hurl.cygnus.com \
--to=law@hurl.cygnus.com \
--cc=egcs@cygnus.com \
--cc=pgcc@delorie.com \
--cc=ssnyder@indy.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).