wesommer@athena.mit.edu (Bill Sommerfeld) (04/08/90)
Certainly a recursive function is inlineable. The simple case:
inline int func(i)
{
return i ? 0 : func(i + 1);
}
A modified version of this:
inline int func(int i)
{
if (i)
return 0;
else return func(i+1);
}
will be inlined as a loop by GCC (since it's tail recursive).
- Bill
--
The USSR is one of the few places | Bill Sommerfeld at MIT/Project Athena
on earth where the currency is | sommerfeld@mit.edu
softer than the toilet paper |davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) (04/09/90)
In article <156@dumbcat.UUCP> marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) writes: Inlines must be declared as such before they are used. The declaration can be part of a definition. This puts the programmer in the position of either declaring inlines within the class body or ensuring the functions are in a certain order. I know I'm gonna get hit about this, but... What's wrong with: class alpha { ... public: ... int beta(); }; ... inline int beta() { ... } You can then (potentially) do all your class declarations before doing any inline definitions and finally the rest of the definitions. Well? -- =================================================================== David Masterson Consilium, Inc. uunet!cimshop!davidm Mt. View, CA 94043 =================================================================== "If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!"
zhu@crabcake.cs.jhu.edu (Benjamin Zhu) (04/09/90)
In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Apr8170427@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes: >In article <156@dumbcat.UUCP> marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) writes: > > Inlines must be declared as such before they are used. The declaration > can be part of a definition. This puts the programmer in the position of > either declaring inlines within the class body or ensuring the functions > are in a certain order. > >I know I'm gonna get hit about this, but... > >What's wrong with: > >class alpha { > ... >public: > ... > int beta(); >}; >... >inline int beta() { ... } ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Forgive my stupidity, but what does this mean? You claim that using this inlining function beta can help you get around the problem (my guess). However, within class alpha's declaration, beta is a member function; whereas in your inline part, it becomes a function of file scope. Of course they are different. On the other hand, if this is a kludge to help you get around the language restraint (say inlines functions have to be declared within the class declaration), what can I say? I prefer not to have magic like this. I do not have the original posting with me. So I should stop flaming around. But frankly, inline functions in C++ are a little bit mysterious. Sigh. > >You can then (potentially) do all your class declarations before doing any >inline definitions and finally the rest of the definitions. Well? > >-- >=================================================================== >David Masterson Consilium, Inc. >uunet!cimshop!davidm Mt. View, CA 94043 >=================================================================== >"If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!" Benjamin Zhu zhu@cs.jhu.edu ==================================================================== Sorry, but I have no disclaimer for you ====================================================================
dbarnhar@oiscola.Columbia.NCR.COM (David C. Barnhart II) (04/10/90)
In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Apr8170427@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes: >In article <156@dumbcat.UUCP> marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) writes: > > Inlines must be declared as such before they are used. The declaration > can be part of a definition. This puts the programmer in the position of > either declaring inlines within the class body or ensuring the functions > are in a certain order. > >I know I'm gonna get hit about this, but... > >What's wrong with: > >class alpha { > ... >public: > ... > int beta(); >}; >... >inline int beta() { ... } > >You can then (potentially) do all your class declarations before doing any >inline definitions and finally the rest of the definitions. Well? > As long as the line reads: inline int alpha::beta() { ... } the above type of construct works just fine with Glockenspiel C++ 2.0a, and perhaps with other compilers as well, so you wouldn't have to declare your functions inline in the class definition. Dave Barnhart NCR Office Information Systems 3245 Platt Springs Rd. West Columbia, SC 29169 Hit 'n' now, inews fodder below . . .
davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) (04/10/90)
In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Apr8170427@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes: In article <156@dumbcat.UUCP> marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) writes: Inlines must be declared as such before they are used. The declaration can be part of a definition. This puts the programmer in the position of either declaring inlines within the class body or ensuring the functions are in a certain order. I know I'm gonna get hit about this, but... What's wrong with: class alpha { ... public: ... int beta(); }; ... inline int beta() { ... } // <== oops, I meant "alpha::beta" Slip of the keyboard, but I did mean "alpha::beta". As has been pointed out to me, this can still have problems if a reference to beta occurs before its use. I guess this is why my .H files contain the class declaration plus any inline definitions and my .C files contain the rest of the member function definitions. -- =================================================================== David Masterson Consilium, Inc. uunet!cimshop!davidm Mt. View, CA 94043 =================================================================== "If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!"