Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!elroy!orion.cf.uci.edu!oberon!nunki.usc.edu!jeenglis
From: jeenglis@nunki.usc.edu (Joe English)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: inline & Zortech compiler
Message-ID: <3390@nunki.usc.edu>
Date: 5 Apr 89 03:30:40 GMT
References: <42890@clyde.ATT.COM> <1911@dataio.Data-IO.COM>
Reply-To: jeenglis@nunki.usc.edu (Joe English)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 26


bright@dataio.Data-IO.COM (Walter Bright) writes:
>The compiler will generate a real function call, rather than inline
>expanding an inline function, in the following cases:
>1. Calling it through a pointer-to-inline-function.
>2. If the body of the function contains if, goto, do, for, while or
>   switch statements.
[... other (fairly obvious) reasons]

>It's quite difficult to inline expand a switch or loop statement, and the
>utility of it is poor, so it's not done. (The purpose of inlining is to
>gain speed, and for a loop most of the time is presumably in the loop, not
>in the function call.)

Not inlining loops and switches makes sense, but why not
if statements?  Having functions with if's inlined could 
be useful in a lot of cases, for example, doing a quick 
check for parameter validity before executing the rest of
the code.

What are the technical problems with inlining if's? 


--Joe English

  jeenglis@nunki.usc.edu