search for: __forceinline

...hing in > > that case) ? > > I think this would allow removal of the "inline" after > > LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE. > > Wouldn't this cause functions with MSVC that are marked > LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE but not 'inline' to not be inlined? > __forceinline means that MSVC will always inline that function, that is why the extra "inline" results in a warning. I propose: in llvm/Support/Compiler.h #if __has_attribute(always_inline) || LLVM_GNUC_PREREQ(4, 0, 0) #define LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE __attribute__((always_inline)) #elif define...

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Xinliang David Li via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE is defined to be __forceinline for MSVC. I > wonder why you get that warning. inline and __forceinline don't mix with MSVC -- I believe they may be modeled with the same attribute under the hood. I'm not certain of the best way to solve this aside from suggesting to ignore C4141 locally. ~Aaron > > David >...

Now this is interesting: Revision: 158653 Author: mspencer Date: Monday, 18 June, 2012 09:00:48 Message: [MSExtensions] Add support for __forceinline. __forceinline is a combination of the inline keyword and __attribute__((always_inline))

Hi all, Some functions have "inline" specified twice by use of LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE. For example in StringRef.h: LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE inline bool operator==(StringRef LHS, StringRef RHS); This results in warning noise when compiled with MSVC 2015: \include\llvm/ADT/StringRef.h(567): warning C4141: 'inline': used more than once

Hi Nikola, Thank you very much for your feedback! I am beginning to feel slightly dizzy from all the suggestions that go against each other :-) I'll fix the documentation so that it uses MinGW and MinGW-W64. I'll ignore that the 64-bit version targets both 32-bit and 64-bit Windows, so as to keep things simple. I'll use your link, thank you for that. It is intended to be a brief,

...tatic'. If the functions are defined as static, they are inlined and removed during compilation. Without the static definition, the optimizer doesn't know it is safe to remove the functions after they have been inlined. It seems that MSVC silently promotes any function declared __inline or __forceinline to static (or something equivalent/similar). My thinking is adding in a "compatibility" layer to clang so that when dealing with windows header files clang also promotes any function defined as inline to static storage. What does the list think? Is this a good idea? If it is, where would...

Hi, I've downloaded the Speex-1.1.5 code and am trying to compile the Speexdec code using Microsoft VC++ 6.0 IDE. When I try to open the speexdec.dsw workspace, I get a dialog asking to locate the ogg_static file. I simply cancel that message, and then the project is opened in the VC++ 6.0 IDE. Now, when I simply try to compile the program, I receive this 5 error messages. error1.

...#define M_PI 3.14159265358979323846 /* pi */ #endif - Replace inline with __inline in lsp.c line 105 static inline spx_word16_t spx_cos(spx_word16_t x) According to msdn: The inline keyword is available only in C++. The __inline and __forceinline keywords are available in both C and C++. When compiling in debug mode, I also get 530 warnings about double to float conversions. In release mode I don't get these warnings because the warning level is set to 1. Do these conversions impact performance? I think...

Hi, I just downloaded http://www.speex.org/download/speex-1.1.4.tar.gz and tried to build it but the file denoise.c seems to be missing from the archive. Can you fix this or is it better to get everything from cvs? Another question, when will a stable version of 1.1 be released. I'm interested in the preprocess features but I would also like a stable encoder/decoder :-) Best regards, Chris

I''m tinkering with some code to be able to talk to the hypervisor from Windows, with the ultimate aim to get a usable xenbus. So far I''ve created a driver for the Xen PCI ''device'', and (hopefully) mapped the hypercall space given by the CPUID call... What is the simplest hypercall I can make to get an answer from the hypervisor to tell me that it''s

WARNING: This is not compatible with the previous lz4 patchset. If you''re using experimental compression that isn''t in mainline kernels, be prepared to backup and restore or decompress before upgrading, and have backups in case it eats data (which appears not to be a problem any more, but has been during development). These patches add lz4 and lz4hc compression

Hi, so here it is, LZ4 compression method inside btrfs. The patchset is based on top of current Chris'' for-linus + Andi''s snappy implementation + the fixes from Li Zefan. Passes xfstests and stresstests. I haven''t measured performance on wide range of hardware or workloads, rather wanted to publish the patches before I get distracted again. I''d like to ask