typeid resolved at compilation time?

[David Portabella]

Hello,

I have the following template class:
+++++++++++++++ +++++++
template <class Valueclass Test {
public:
void f() {
if (typeid(Value) == typeid(string))
cout << "Value is a string" << endl;
else
cout << "Value is not a string" << endl;
}
};
+++++++++++++++ ++++++
Then, given the following code:
+++++++++++++++ ++++++
Test<stringtest 1;
test1.f();
+++++++++++++++ ++++++

is "typeid(Val ue) == typeid(string)" resolved at compilation time or
at execution time?

(that is, in the same way that "3==3" is resolved at compilation time,
because of gcc optimizes the code)

-------
And in general,
how to check if the compiler optimized such things?
that is, with g++ -S I get the assembler code, but it is difficult to
see something there. is there an intermediate language between cpp and
the -S output?
maybe something that converts c++ to c? that would be useful to see
what the compiler achieve to optimize.
Many thanks,
DAvid

[blargg]

In article
<49************ *************** *************** *********@gmail .com>, David
Portabella <da************ **@gmail.comwro te:

[trimmed]
template <class Valueclass Test {
public:
void f() {
if (typeid(Value) == typeid(string))
cout << "Value is a string" << endl;
else
cout << "Value is not a string" << endl;
}
};

Test<stringtest 1;
test1.f();

is "typeid(Val ue) == typeid(string)" resolved at compilation time or
at execution time?

Depends on the compiler.

(that is, in the same way that "3==3" is resolved at compilation time,
because of gcc optimizes the code)

3 == 3 could be resolved at run-time as well. Depends on the compiler.

And in general,
how to check if the compiler optimized such things?
that is, with g++ -S I get the assembler code, but it is difficult to
see something there. is there an intermediate language between cpp and
the -S output?

// test.cpp

void at_run_time(); // not defined anywhere

int main()
{
if ( condition_that_ you_know_is_fal se )
at_run_time();
}

If the above program links, then condition was resolved at compile-time.
If you get a linker error about missing at_run_time(), then it wasn't
resolved at compile-time.

[David Portabella]

bl********@gish puppy.com (blargg) wrote:

In article
<49************ *************** *************** *********@gmail .com>, David
Portabella <da************ **@gmail.comwro te:

>[trimmed]
template <class Valueclass Test {
public:
void f() {
if (typeid(Value) == typeid(string))
cout << "Value is a string" << endl;
else
cout << "Value is not a string" << endl;
}
};

Test<stringtes t1;
test1.f();

is "typeid(Val ue) == typeid(string)" resolved at compilation time or
at execution time?

Depends on the compiler.

>(that is, in the same way that "3==3" is resolved at compilation time,
because of gcc optimizes the code)

3 == 3 could be resolved at run-time as well. Depends on the compiler.

>And in general,
how to check if the compiler optimized such things?
that is, with g++ -S I get the assembler code, but it is difficult to
see something there. is there an intermediate language between cpp and
the -S output?

// test.cpp

void at_run_time(); // not defined anywhere

int main()
{
if ( condition_that_ you_know_is_fal se )
at_run_time();
}

If the above program links, then condition was resolved at compile-time.
If you get a linker error about missing at_run_time(), then it wasn't
resolved at compile-time.

Hey, that's a good trick! :)

One more question in this direction,
how to test if the compiler toke into account or ignored the fact that a
function is declared inline?

+++++++++++++
inline int sum(int a, int b) {
return a+b;
}

int main() {
int c = sum(3,4);
}
+++++++++++++
Many thanks,
DAvid

[=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Marcel_M=FCller?=]

Hi!

David Portabella schrieb:

> // test.cpp

void at_run_time(); // not defined anywhere

int main()
{
if ( condition_that_ you_know_is_fal se )
at_run_time();
}

If the above program links, then condition was resolved at compile-time.
If you get a linker error about missing at_run_time(), then it wasn't
resolved at compile-time.

Hey, that's a good trick! :)

Unfortunately it is not working in all ceses, because the compiler may
not discard unreachable code.

One more question in this direction,
how to test if the compiler toke into account or ignored the fact that a
function is declared inline?

+++++++++++++
inline int sum(int a, int b) {
return a+b;
}

int main() {
int c = sum(3,4);
}

Call the function some million times and call the same function from
another object module same as often and look at the runtime difference.
Marcel

[Paul Carter]

On Aug 7, 11:38 am, David Portabella <david.portabe. [e-mail]>
wrote:

blargg....@gish puppy.com (blargg) wrote:

In article
<49BF4EC8-28AD-492C-BCD3-492C7E57BC16%da vid.portabe...@ gmail.com>, David
Portabella <david.portabe. [e-mail] te:

[trimmed]
template <class Valueclass Test {
public:
void f() {
if (typeid(Value) == typeid(string))
cout << "Value is a string" << endl;
else
cout << "Value is not a string" << endl;
}
};

Test<stringtest 1;
test1.f();

is "typeid(Val ue) == typeid(string)" resolved at compilation time or
at execution time?

Depends on the compiler.

(that is, in the same way that "3==3" is resolved at compilation time,
because of gcc optimizes the code)

3 == 3 could be resolved at run-time as well. Depends on the compiler.

And in general,
how to check if the compiler optimized such things?
that is, with g++ -S I get the assembler code, but it is difficult to
see something there. is there an intermediate language between cpp and
the -S output?

// test.cpp

void at_run_time(); // not defined anywhere

int main()
{
if ( condition_that_ you_know_is_fal se )
at_run_time();
}

If the above program links, then condition was resolved at compile-time.
If you get a linker error about missing at_run_time(), then it wasn't
resolved at compile-time.

Hey, that's a good trick! :)

One more question in this direction,
how to test if the compiler toke into account or ignored the fact that a
function is declared inline?

+++++++++++++
inline int sum(int a, int b) {
return a+b;

}

int main() {
int c = sum(3,4);}

+++++++++++++

Many thanks,
DAvid

The most direct way would be have the compiler create an assembly
listing for the code (-S for *nix compilers like g++) and look to see
if a subroutine call is made or not.

--
Paul

[James Kanze]

On Aug 7, 8:34 pm, Paul Carter <pacman...@gmai l.comwrote:

On Aug 7, 11:38 am, David Portabella <david.portabe. [e-mail]>
wrote:

[...]

One more question in this direction, how to test if the
compiler toke into account or ignored the fact that a
function is declared inline?

Is it ever relevant?

+++++++++++++
inline int sum(int a, int b) {
return a+b;
}

int main() {
int c = sum(3,4);}
+++++++++++++

The most direct way would be have the compiler create an
assembly listing for the code (-S for *nix compilers like g++)
and look to see if a subroutine call is made or not.

The compiler could generate an out of line instance, and still
generate the code inline in main. (FWIW: g++ more or less
ignores the "inline" in the above code. If optimization is
turned off, it calls the out of line version, and if
optimization is turned on, it will generate the code inline,
with or without the "inline" keyword". I expect that g++ is not
alone in this.)

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja******* **@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientier ter Datenverarbeitu ng
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, [phone]