On 30 May 2005, at 19:53, Jamie McCracken wrote:
At the point the inlining is performed, the compiler does not
have the slightest idea how large the function will be in terms
of bytes. There is already a an extremely crude "complexity
calculation" function, but it does not have any rela
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 30 May 2005, at 18:29, Jamie McCracken wrote:
What would be nice is to have a compiler switch which takes say an
8bit value to indicate how many bytes a function must contain in
order to be inlined automatically. That way it is scaleable and so
wont exacerbate the ex
Vinzent Hoefler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> attached a patch which reenables (at least according to my tests) the
> SIGINT and SIGTERM key handling which is a strong indication that
> exception handling might work again. Further tests regarding exception
> handling should be done yet. I'm onto it.
Thank
On 30 May 2005, at 18:29, Jamie McCracken wrote:
What would be nice is to have a compiler switch which takes say an
8bit value to indicate how many bytes a function must contain in
order to be inlined automatically. That way it is scaleable and so
wont exacerbate the executable file size p
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
well thats soemthing you should add to your to do list. Automatic
inlining can deliver a signifcant performance improvement especially as
delphi uses a lot of one line procedures to set property values. A
fucntion call adds quite a bit of overhead (around 10+ clock c
> | yy[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> | > > Nobody said that the same size can be reached, but I don't consider 132k
> | > > against 86k as a real problem. If you consider it as a problem, use
> | > > Delphi.
> | >
> | > That's not what I ment. I see a problem with a GUI app t
Jamie McCracken wrote:
> > Yes, but the poster was asking whether the compiler never decided by
> > itself to inline something (even if no "inline" directive was
> > specified). That's not the case currently.
>
> well thats soemthing you should add to your to do list. Automatic
> inlining can del
Hi,
attached a patch which reenables (at least according to my tests) the
SIGINT and SIGTERM key handling which is a strong indication that
exception handling might work again. Further tests regarding exception
handling should be done yet. I'm onto it.
So, if nobody complains, I hereby apply f
On Sun, 29 May 2005, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
A friend has found some obvious errors in the FPC syntax description,
and I found some more errors. Here is our current list:
==
page Expected Error Description
=
A friend has found some obvious errors in the FPC syntax description,
and I found some more errors. Here is our current list:
==
page Expected Error Description
===
10 matches
Mail list logo
