Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 05:34 PM 8/1/00 -0400, John Tobey wrote: > >Okay. For starters, assume that every inline function is called in > >exactly one place in the translation unit that defines its non-inline > >counterpart. That one place being, of course, i_foo's foo. This is a > >natural result of a clean, PI-like-generated source. > > Bad assumption. How often is av_fill called? By "assume" I mean "ensure" here. As in, this is how we build our library. -- John Tobey, late nite hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> \\\ /// ]]] With enough bugs, all eyes are shallow. [[[ /// \\\
- Re: inline mania Simon Cozens
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Dan Sugalski
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Dan Sugalski
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Dan Sugalski
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Dan Sugalski
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Dan Sugalski
- Re: inline mania Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Nick Ing-Simmons
- performance of inlined code (was Re: inline mania) John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: inline mania John Tobey
- Re: inline mania Dan Sugalski
- Re: inline mania John Tobey