Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Third release is ready, requesting preliminary review
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-05 12:53:24
Stewart, Robert wrote:
> Steven Watanabe wrote:
>> Stewart, Robert wrote:
>>> Sure, but that's not portable, which is the goal within Boost.
>> What do you mean by portable? You have no guarantee
>> that the compiler does it? You don't have any guarantees
>> anyway. The compiler is free to ignore inline.
> Ah, but that's portable behavior by definition.
> As written, the functions in question would only be inlined by a very few platforms. Marked inline in a header, it is the unlikely compiler that wouldn't inline those functions in an optimized build.
As far as I am concerned, this has nothing to do with portability
as a goal for Boost. We're talking about optimizations that don't
affect the observable behavior of any program. The compiler
is free to do whatever it darn well pleases, regardless of whether
you say inline or not. msvc has supported link time code generation
for a while, and gcc now has -flto.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk