Duncan, > >>it looks like this is in essence inlining the run-time library > >>routine. In which case, shouldn't you only do it if inlining is > >>enabled? For example, it seems rather odd to do this if > >>compiling with -Os. > > > >Actually, measurements showed that this instance of inlining is a > >win for both performance and code size, so it???s a good candidate > >even for -Os. Note that we inline string concatenation routines > >for the same reason. > > thanks for explaining. I think it merits a comment in the code though. > > By the way, why not always do this "inlining", even when not optimizing?
That's a practical trade off, based on our past experience. Arno
