Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, smwadministrator, smwcurator, smweditor, Administrators
2,558
edits
Inline Transformation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Implementation in Popular Compilers
Timo.stripf (talk | contribs) |
Timo.stripf (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
== Implementation in Popular Compilers == | == Implementation in Popular Compilers == | ||
Modern compilers provide various ways to control or hint at inline transformation, including language keywords, special attributes, and optimization flags. Notably, '''the decision to inline is ultimately made by the compiler’s optimizer''', which | Modern compilers provide various ways to control or hint at inline transformation, including language keywords, special attributes, and optimization flags. Notably, '''the decision to inline is ultimately made by the compiler’s optimizer''', which considers factors such as function size, complexity, and the chosen optimization level. Depending on the optimization settings (e.g., -O0 vs. -O3), inlining behavior can vary significantly. Below is how inline expansion is handled in a few popular C/C++ compilers: | ||
=== Always Inline === | |||
Compilers offer mechanisms to enforce inlining of functions even when regular inlining is disabled (e.g. by <code>-O0</code>). | |||
* '''GCC & Clang/LLVM''': Both compilers support <code>__attribute__((always_inline))</code>, ensuring that a function is inlined even when optimizations are disabled. If inlining is not possible (e.g., due to recursion or taking the function’s address), an error or warning is emitted. | |||
* '''MSVC''': Offers the __forceinline keyword, which strongly suggests inlining but does not guarantee it. If inlining is not feasible, the function remains out-of-line, and the compiler may issue a warning. | |||
=== GCC (GNU Compiler Collection) === | === GCC (GNU Compiler Collection) === | ||