Jean-Claude, you can expect your compiler to ignore your "inline" declaration. Or do something else with it. It is just a hint. [1]
A sufficiently smart compiler might use compile-time type inference to find a method matching some set of argument types and then replace the function invocation by the body of that method. To me, it appears to be questionable whether such a smart compiler would depend on inline declarations. I am just a user, though, and maybe one of the compiler writers on this list want to add some of the fine points surrounding this :) -Hans [1] http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/d_inline.htm 2014-07-10 0:00 GMT+02:00 Jean-Claude Beaudoin < jean.claude.beaud...@gmail.com>: > Hello CL pros, > > I am trying to figure out the meaning of the inline declaration when the > so qualified function happens to be a generic function. As in: > > (declaim (inline foo)) > (defgeneric foo (a b)) > > What can be expected of a compiler when it then faces a call to foo while > the above is in effect? > > Is this an obvious no-op or did some find something useful to do in such a > context? > > Thanks for your help, > > JCB > > > _______________________________________________ > pro mailing list > pro@common-lisp.net > http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro > >
_______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
