On Dec 17, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Lisandro Dalcín wrote:

>>> Good point, please push. Are there any other compilers that we  
>>> should
>>> single out? We heavily use the assumption that inlined functions
>>> actually get inlined for optimization purposes.
>>>
>>
>> Intel? PathScale? PGI? Borland? (Open) Watcom?
>>
>> I can do it for Intel and PathScale ...

Never heard of PathScale, but if you think there's a good chance of  
people compiling Cython code with it than it shouldn't hurt. Also,  
inline is part of the C99 standard, maybe we could check for that  
generically too.

>
> BTW, we should protect all these definitions of INLINE inside an outer
> #ifndef INLINE ... #endif. That way, in the face of a compiler Cython
> is not aware of, we can pass -DINLINE=something and make it work. What
> do you think?

Yes, we should.

- Robert

_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to