From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump) To: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com, pderbysh@usa.net Subject: Re: Question about compiler-supplied assignment and copy with egcs. Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:27:00 -0000 Message-id: <199902250026.QAA04615@kankakee.wrs.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-02/msg01222.html > Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 06:19:53 -0500 > To: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com > From: Paul Derbyshire > Q: If egcs is allowed to supply the assignment operator and copy > constructor for a "plain old data" type, will they be generally more > efficient than user supplied versions? This is a reasonable assumption. If it is ever false, I think a performance enhancement request is reasonable. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump) To: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com, pderbysh@usa.net Subject: Re: Question about compiler-supplied assignment and copy with egcs. Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 22:53:00 -0000 Message-ID: <199902250026.QAA04615@kankakee.wrs.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-02n/msg01231.html Message-ID: <19990228225300.i55CiRzcDdQHwk-FL8vYxeReRA-BhcHyWd65U4Axkk0@z> > Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 06:19:53 -0500 > To: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com > From: Paul Derbyshire > Q: If egcs is allowed to supply the assignment operator and copy > constructor for a "plain old data" type, will they be generally more > efficient than user supplied versions? This is a reasonable assumption. If it is ever false, I think a performance enhancement request is reasonable.