On Apr 30, 5:13 am, Mathias Gaunard <loufo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 30 avr, 01:38, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > With macros, I don't have to worry about return value, or reference
> > indirection elimination, or prolog/epilog code that I might have to
> > struggle to get rid of. I simply use one line of code for say,
> > MULTIPLY, and be done with it:
>
> So basically you're using macros because you're afraid your compiler
> won't be able to inline functions, do constant propagation and alias
> analysis as it should.
>
> Why not just generate the assembler in both cases and see if there is
> any difference.
Because I do not have access to the 20 or so compilers that will be
used to compile my code, and the likelihood that I will be able to
control the exact code generated is greater for asm+macro than asm
+inline function.
Also, if inline asm is not available on a compiler, as is case of
Visual C++ for Itanium, there is possibilty of fallback to a function.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm
for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
|
