search for: alwais_inline

...r being inlined after the change. (That's just > annecdotal, of course: LLVM may have gotten good enough to make it > practical. If that's the case, I still think it's too early to write C > ++ code with that assumption.) > There is often a keyword force_inline or alwais_inline if needed Cédric

...change. >> (That's just annecdotal, of course: LLVM may have gotten good >> enough to make it practical. If that's the case, I still think >> it's too early to write C ++ code with that assumption.) >> > > There is often a keyword force_inline or alwais_inline if needed Yes, but that's not portable. It's also not the same thing (and usually less useful than a plain "inline" hint, IMO). Daveed

On Aug 26, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: [...] > > The second part of this is that there are a lot of reasons for things > to be defined inline in C++ even if we don't want it to actually be > inlined. I don't think those are _good_ reasons though: If one doesn't want a C+ + function to be inlined, one shouldn't define it inline. > For example,

On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Devang Patel wrote: >>> I do not understand how the "inlinehint" will help. How will it >>> influence the inliner ? >> >> The hint should make it more attractive to inline. I don't know >> the details >> yet and they will require some experimenting. >> > > In that case you want to add hint to A