Re: [Mingw-w64-public] dllexport/inline pessimization (hack included)

2013-06-15 Thread Kai Tietz
Hi, first thanks for the heads-up. Pretty interesting finding. 2013/6/15 Óscar Fuentes : > This issue was raised on the sf forum: > > http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/discussion/723797/thread/cd8a855f > > but I very much prefer to use the mailing list. > > The problem: marking a class as dllex

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] What is the purpose of intrin.h?

2013-06-15 Thread Kai Tietz
2013/6/15 dw : > >> we don't need to maintain implementation at two places, if we do >> things right. > Are you talking about something like what I did with intrin-mac.h? While > that allows us to (mostly) write it once, you still need to have it in > two places (and test both). Or did you mean s

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] What is the purpose of intrin.h?

2013-06-15 Thread dw
> we don't need to maintain implementation at two places, if we do > things right. Are you talking about something like what I did with intrin-mac.h? While that allows us to (mostly) write it once, you still need to have it in two places (and test both). Or did you mean something else? If y

[Mingw-w64-public] dllexport/inline pessimization (hack included)

2013-06-15 Thread Óscar Fuentes
This issue was raised on the sf forum: http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/discussion/723797/thread/cd8a855f but I very much prefer to use the mailing list. The problem: marking a class as dllexport prevents the inlining of its class methods. I guess the same applies to inline functions. This has

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] What is the purpose of intrin.h?

2013-06-15 Thread Kai Tietz
2013/6/15 dw : > My responses: > > - While I don't really see the benefit, I'm ok with putting the inline > implementations in their own .h file. And it's going to feel odd > putting an include at the *bottom* of a file. Well, I see advantage exactly in the point of having the ability to reuse im

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Python on x64

2013-06-15 Thread Felix Lelchuk
Hi Dick That looks promising. I would like very much to see Python move to CMake in the future. It is always a pleasure to build software using CMake. Especially you can easily choose to build it using the excellent MinGW64. However I decided to use a ready-to-use python distro, WinPython, for my

Re: [Mingw-w64-public] What is the purpose of intrin.h?

2013-06-15 Thread dw
My responses: - While I don't really see the benefit, I'm ok with putting the inline implementations in their own .h file. And it's going to feel odd putting an include at the *bottom* of a file. - While duplicating the work (and adding an additional .c file) is a pain, having the implementat