Subject: [ggl] inline keyword in class definition
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz)
Date: 2009-05-06 15:18:12
Bruno Lalande wrote:
>> Just a side note, I'm not Cygwin nor MinGW expert, but I've heard
>> GCC does not optimize well on Windows. It tells me that these ports
>> are not bets choices to measure performance.
> I think the best choice to measure performance is to use what's used
> in industry, and those two products are widely used.
Sure, Visual C++ and GCC are well settled in the industry, but
I'm not sure sure about GCC on Windows.
> Besides that, GCC doesn't optimize well on Windows regarding
> Windows-specific stuff only. But the general optimizations mechanics,
> like inlining, remain unchanged.
Right. By the way, I've found an interesting comparison:
C++ Performance Benchmarks (VC++ 2008 vs. MinGW gcc 4.3)
I've always been sceptic about any form of GCC under Windows
(though I love GCC on Unix). Perhaps I should change my mind
about MinGW :-)
>> Sure, I'm not going to remove. I wanted to check if we want to put
>> must specify inline" as a guideline.
> I think you could state "inline keywork is only needed on free
> functions" BUT not until we've tested this assumption on several
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net