This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Is a function actually inlined?
- From: Lapo Luchini <lapo at lapo dot it>
- To: Alex Vinokur <alexvn at connect dot to>, Mailing List: CygWin <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 11:55:33 +0200
- Subject: Re: Is a function actually inlined?
- References: <bm0ks2$j8i$2@sea.gmane.org>
Alex Vinokur wrote:
====== 2. Compilation : BEGIN ======
$ g++ -save-temps t.cpp
====== 2. Compilation : END ========
I think you must use smoe level of optimization to get inlines:
from "man gcc":
-fno-inline
Don't pay attention to the inline keyword. Normally this
option is
used to keep the compiler from expanding any functions inline.
Note that if you are not optimizing, no functions can be expanded
inline.
-finline-functions
Integrate all simple functions into their callers. The compiler
heuristically decides which functions are simple enough to be
worth
integrating in this way.
If all calls to a given function are integrated, and the function
is declared static, then the function is normally not output as
assembler code in its own right.
Enabled at level -O3.
--
Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
lapo@lapo.it (PGP & X.509 keys available)
http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/