Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!ulysses!hector!jss
From: jss@hector.UUCP (Jerry Schwarz)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: address of virtual function (revisited)
Message-ID: <11522@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com>
Date: 12 May 89 15:35:23 GMT
References: <904@garya.Solbourne.COM> <6590121@hplsla.HP.COM>
Sender: netnews@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com
Reply-To: jss@hector.UUCP (Jerry Schwarz)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 19

In article <6590121@hplsla.HP.COM> jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock) writes:

>
>Okay, so perhaps you can tell us whether the release version of 2.0
>will be able to inline in the following almost-as-trivial situation:
...

I was going to ignore that question, because I cannot make any
commitments about the released 2.0.

However,  for the record, I ran that code and  the current cfront
installed on my machine inlines the call of k.size().

I personally doubt that this optimization is important.  In practice
I believe very few calls to virtual functions are even theoretically
inlinable.

Jerry Schwarz
AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill