What gets inlined?

[Steven T. Hatton]

I know this is, to some extent, implementation dependent, but since the
Standard specifies an inline specifier, there must be some "reasonable
assumptions" I can make about what should happen when I inline a function.

Suppose I have something like this (which, BTW is currently broken in
Qt-4-rc1):

inline QWidget* vBox(QWidget* parent) {
QWidget* box = new QWidget(parent) ;
QVBoxLayout* boxLayout = new QVBoxLayout(box );
box->setLayout(boxL ayout);
return box;
}

Clearly, there will be a lot happening between the entry point, and the
return from the function. My understanding is that all of the object code
involved will not be inlined, and only the compiled representation of the
function calls will be placed inline. Is this correct?
--
If our hypothesis is about anything and not about some one or more
particular things, then our deductions constitute mathematics. Thus
mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we
are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.-Bertrand Russell

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* Steven T. Hatton:

I know this is, to some extent, implementation dependent, but since the
Standard specifies an inline specifier, there must be some "reasonable
assumptions" I can make about what should happen when I inline a function.

Suppose I have something like this (which, BTW is currently broken in
Qt-4-rc1):

inline QWidget* vBox(QWidget* parent) {
QWidget* box = new QWidget(parent) ;
QVBoxLayout* boxLayout = new QVBoxLayout(box );
box->setLayout(boxL ayout);
return box;
}

Clearly, there will be a lot happening between the entry point, and the
return from the function. My understanding is that all of the object code
involved will not be inlined, and only the compiled representation of the
function calls will be placed inline. Is this correct?

No. Essentially you can't assume anything. And that's a FAQ:

<url: http://www.parashift.c om/c++-faq-lite/inline-functions.html# faq-9.3>

If you want optimization, tell your compiler to optimize.

If you want control over inlining, which is something else, use
compiler-specific language extensions.

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

[Rolf Magnus]

Steven T. Hatton wrote:

I know this is, to some extent, implementation dependent, but since the
Standard specifies an inline specifier, there must be some "reasonable
assumptions" I can make about what should happen when I inline a function.

Yes. You can expect to be able to define it in multiple translation units
without getting an error. However, you can't assume any inlining to happen
or not happen.

[Steven T. Hatton]

Rolf Magnus wrote:

Steven T. Hatton wrote:

I know this is, to some extent, implementation dependent, but since the
Standard specifies an inline specifier, there must be some "reasonable
assumptions" I can make about what should happen when I inline a
function.

Yes. You can expect to be able to define it in multiple translation units
without getting an error. However, you can't assume any inlining to happen
or not happen.

My question has to do with _what_ gets inlined _if_ the compiler inlines the
function? I suspect that doesn't vary a lot between implementations , but I
could be wrong.
--
If our hypothesis is about anything and not about some one or more
particular things, then our deductions constitute mathematics. Thus
mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we
are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.-Bertrand Russell

[velthuijsen]

Everywhere that the inlined function is visible the function call gets
replaced by the code in the function with appropiate substitutions for
return value and the passed variable(s).

[velthuijsen]

Keep forgetting that Google quick reply chucks out the reply to text so
here again:

My question has to do with _what_ gets inlined _if_ the compiler inlines the
function? I suspect that doesn't vary a lot between implementations , but I
could be wrong.
--
If our hypothesis is about anything and not about some one or more
particular things, then our deductions constitute mathematics. Thus
mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we
are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.-Bertrand Russell

If inline occurs the following:
Everywhere that the inlined function is visible the function call gets
replaced by the code in the function with appropiate substitutions for
return value and the passed variable(s).

[Steven T. Hatton]

ve*********@hot mail.com wrote:

Everywhere that the inlined function is visible the function call gets
replaced by the code in the function with appropiate substitutions for
return value and the passed variable(s).

What happens when the inlined function has calls to other functions? I
believe it is correct to assume that the object code for these functions
is /not/ inlined. Unless of course those functions are also declared
inline, and the compile feels like doing it.
--
If our hypothesis is about anything and not about some one or more
particular things, then our deductions constitute mathematics. Thus
mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we
are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.-Bertrand Russell

[msalters]

ve*********@hot mail.com schreef:

Everywhere that the inlined function is visible ( and possibly other places as well ) the function call gets replaced ( it the compiler follows your hint) by the code in the function ( or parts of it, e.g. if the compiler can't inline everything) with appropiate substitutions for return value and the passed
variable(s).

It's very much a hint to the compiler. What it does with such a hint
is intentionally obscure. E.g. I'd expect a very good compiler not to
inline a catch(...) clause. That's typically cold code, keep that in
a separate function but do inline the try{ } body.

HTH,
Michiel Salters

[Chris Theis]

"Steven T. Hatton" <ch********@ger mania.sup> wrote in message
news:Ot******** ************@sp eakeasy.net...

ve*********@hot mail.com wrote:

Everywhere that the inlined function is visible the function call gets
replaced by the code in the function with appropiate substitutions for
return value and the passed variable(s).

What happens when the inlined function has calls to other functions? I
believe it is correct to assume that the object code for these functions
is /not/ inlined. Unless of course those functions are also declared
inline, and the compile feels like doing it.

Whether the compiler will inline & substitute also subsequent function calls
in inlined functions is at the mercy of your compiler. There is no general
rule for this.

Cheers
Chris

[John Carson]

"Steven T. Hatton" <ch********@ger mania.sup> wrote in message
news:f7******** ************@sp eakeasy.net

I know this is, to some extent, implementation dependent, but since
the Standard specifies an inline specifier, there must be some
"reasonable assumptions" I can make about what should happen when I
inline a function.

Suppose I have something like this (which, BTW is currently broken in
Qt-4-rc1):

inline QWidget* vBox(QWidget* parent) {
QWidget* box = new QWidget(parent) ;
QVBoxLayout* boxLayout = new QVBoxLayout(box );
box->setLayout(boxL ayout);
return box;
}

Clearly, there will be a lot happening between the entry point, and
the return from the function. My understanding is that all of the
object code involved will not be inlined, and only the compiled
representation of the function calls will be placed inline. Is this
correct? --

Generally, yes, unless the functions called are themselves inline functions.

Lots of people in these threads talk about it being "all up to the compiler"
to inline or not inline as it sees fit. With VC++, there is a switch that
turns on "auto-inlining", whereby the compiler can inline any function it
wants. With the default settings, however, no function is inlined unless the
inline keyword is used (or the function definition is in the class
declaration, since this is equivalent to using the inline keyword), i.e.,
use of the inline keyword is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition
for a function to be inlined. For other compilers, I guess you have to
consult their documentation.

--
John Carson