Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, smwadministrator, smwcurator, smweditor, Administrators
2,558
edits
Inline Transformation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Always Inline
Timo.stripf (talk | contribs) |
Timo.stripf (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
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: | 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 === | === Always Inline Attribute === | ||
Compilers offer mechanisms to enforce inlining of functions even when regular inlining is disabled (e.g. by <code>-O0</code>). | Compilers offer mechanisms to enforce inlining of functions even when regular inlining is disabled (e.g. by <code>-O0</code>). | ||