Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 19:44:05 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Can't inline routines from other moudles
In-Reply-To: <ranla.82.000F3D2D@post.tau.ac.il>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.981108194129.14294D-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com


On Sun, 8 Nov 1998, Tal Lavi wrote:

> Actually, that makes sense, inlining is done in compile time, not in link 
> time, right?

Right.

> Is there a way over this problem? Those routines are called very frequently, 
> and not inlining them may cause a huge performance issue.

``May cause'' or ``does cause''?  There's a big difference between these 
two.  I suggest to profile the program before you go to extremes like 
that.

The way to inline library functions is to copy their definitions into 
your source, or to write your own substitutes for them.  Is it really 
worth this hassle?

Which functions are those, btw?