Hello all,
I'm curious as to your opinions on explicitly inlining function? I'm talking
about functions as members of a class. For example, so class A defines a
operator==() and a operator!=():
class_a.h:
class A
{
public:
A();
bool operator==(A &rhs);
inline bool operator!=(A &rhs);
...
};
bool A::operator!=(A &rhs)
{
return !(*this == rhs);
}
Is it something that should be done by the programmer or should we assume
that compiler optimisations will take care of it?
--
Alvin 7 2014
* Alvin: I'm curious as to your opinions on explicitly inlining function? I'm talking about functions as members of a class. For example, so class A defines a operator==() and a operator!=():
class_a.h:
class A { public: A(); bool operator==(A &rhs); inline bool operator!=(A &rhs); ... };
bool A::operator!=(A &rhs) { return !(*this == rhs); }
Is it something that should be done by the programmer or should we assume that compiler optimisations will take care of it?
The keyword 'inline' is not primarily about optimization.
See section 3 of chapter 2.1 (i.e. section 2.1.3) of my attempted correct
C++ tutorial at
<url: http://home.no.net/dubjai/win32cpptut/html/w32cpptut_02.html>
and also the FAQ at
<url: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/inline-functions.html>
(The tutorial refers to the FAQ, and the FAQ refers to the tutorial, so if
you like to go in circles you can follow the links... ;-) )
--
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?
Alvin wrote: Hello all,
I'm curious as to your opinions on explicitly inlining function? I'm talking about functions as members of a class. For example, so class A defines a operator==() and a operator!=():
class_a.h:
class A { public: A(); bool operator==(A &rhs); inline bool operator!=(A &rhs); ... };
bool A::operator!=(A &rhs) { return !(*this == rhs); }
Is it something that should be done by the programmer or should we assume that compiler optimisations will take care of it?
In my opinion, functions and methods should be inlined
when the execution cost of their content is less than
or equal to the function call & return overhead; provided
the function has already been tested as a non-inlined
function.
Exceptions:
1. Development.
Many compilers have problems providing debugging
information for inlined functions.
2. Deliverable headers.
Interfaces for the external customer, such as
libraries, should not have inlined functions;
or change the design so that the delivered headers
do not contain inlined code.
Again, this is my opinion. Yours may differ.
Remember that the keyword "inline" is only a suggestion
to the compiler. The compiler may already be inlining
the function (or eliminating it).
Don't worry about optimizations until the project
works correctly.
--
Thomas Matthews
C++ newsgroup welcome message: http://www.slack.net/~shiva/welcome.txt
C++ Faq: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite
C Faq: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/c-faq/top.html
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++ faq: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/learn/faq/
Other sites: http://www.josuttis.com -- C++ STL Library book http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl -- Standard Template Library
Alvin wrote: I'm curious as to your opinions on explicitly inlining function?
They only way to explicitly inline code is to manually inline code.
I'm talking about functions as members of a class. For example, so class A defines operator==() and operator!=():
> cat class_a.h: class A { public: A(void); bool operator==(const A& rhs) const; inline // not necessary bool operator!=(const A& rhs) const; // ... };
inline bool A::operator!=(const A& rhs) const { return !(*this == rhs); }
Is it something that should be done by the programmer or should we assume that compiler optimisations will take care of it?
Your compiler may choose to inline operator!= automatically
even if you don't use the inline qualifier.
Your compiler may choose *not* to inline operator!= automatically
even if you *do* use the inline qualifier.
The real purpose of the inline qualifier
is to help the compiler with *linkage*.
If you include your header file in two different translation units
then try to link them together,
you'll get error messages from your link editor:
cat class_a.h
#ifndef GUARD_CLASS_A_H
#define GUARD_CLASS_A_H 1
class A {
private:
// representation
int I;
public:
// operators
bool operator==(const A& rhs) const;
bool operator!=(const A& rhs) const;
// constructors
A(int i): I(i) { }
};
bool A::operator!=(const A& rhs) const {
return !(*this == rhs);
}
#endif//GUARD_CLASS_A_H
cat class_a.cpp
#include "class_a.h"
bool A::operator==(const A& rhs) const {
return I == rhs.I;
}
g++ -Wall -ansi -pedantic -c class_a.cpp cat main.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include "class_a.h"
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
A x(13), y(42);
std::cout << (x != y) << std::endl;
return 0;
}
g++ -Wall -ansi -pedantic -o main main.cpp class_a.o
class_a.o(.text+0x0): \
In function `A::operator!=(A const&) const':
: multiple definition of `A::operator!=(A const&) const'
/tmp/cc6QaYwA.o(.text+0x100): first defined here
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Use the inline qualifier for A::operator!=
and the problem goes away.
Thomas Matthews wrote: In my opinion, functions and methods should be inlined when the execution cost of their content is less than or equal to the function call & return overhead; provided the function has already been tested as a non-inlined function.
Exceptions: 1. Development. Many compilers have problems providing debugging information for inlined functions.
2. Deliverable headers. Interfaces for the external customer, such as libraries, should not have inlined functions; or change the design so that the delivered headers do not contain inlined code.
Again, this is my opinion. Yours may differ.
Remember that the keyword "inline" is only a suggestion to the compiler. The compiler may already be inlining the function (or eliminating it).
Don't worry about optimizations until the project works correctly.
You are confused.
Take a look at any quality implementation of the standard library.
You will find that it depends upon heavy use of inline functions
to make the code easier to read, understand and maintain
without sacrificing performance or efficiency.
The real benefit of inline functions [and operators]
is that they allow programmers to decompose large functions
into smaller functions without concern for how
doing so will effect performance.
I prefer to make all functions inline functions
and let the optimizing compiler decide
whether to inline them or not.
In message <n0***************@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>, Thomas
Matthews <Th*************************@sbcglobal.net> writes Alvin wrote: Hello all, I'm curious as to your opinions on explicitly inlining function? I'm talking about functions as members of a class. For example, so class A defines a operator==() and a operator!=(): class_a.h: class A { public: A(); bool operator==(A &rhs); inline bool operator!=(A &rhs); ... }; bool A::operator!=(A &rhs) { return !(*this == rhs); } Is it something that should be done by the programmer or should we assume that compiler optimisations will take care of it?
In my opinion, functions and methods should be inlined when the execution cost of their content is less than or equal to the function call & return overhead; provided the function has already been tested as a non-inlined function.
Exceptions: 1. Development. Many compilers have problems providing debugging information for inlined functions.
2. Deliverable headers. Interfaces for the external customer, such as libraries, should not have inlined functions; or change the design so that the delivered headers do not contain inlined code.
3. Compilation time considerations.
Defining functions inline may require your headers to #include many more
files, which can adversely affect the compilation time of everything
which includes them. If the (non-inline) function is defined elsewhere,
separating implementation from interface, this doesn't arise.
Again, this is my opinion. Yours may differ.
Remember that the keyword "inline" is only a suggestion to the compiler. The compiler may already be inlining the function (or eliminating it).
Don't worry about optimizations until the project works correctly.
--
Richard Herring
In message <d5**********@nntp1.jpl.nasa.gov>, E. Robert Tisdale
<E.**************@jpl.nasa.gov> writes Thomas Matthews wrote:
In my opinion, functions and methods should be inlined when the execution cost of their content is less than or equal to the function call & return overhead; provided the function has already been tested as a non-inlined function. Exceptions: 1. Development. Many compilers have problems providing debugging information for inlined functions. 2. Deliverable headers. Interfaces for the external customer, such as libraries, should not have inlined functions; or change the design so that the delivered headers do not contain inlined code. Again, this is my opinion. Yours may differ. Remember that the keyword "inline" is only a suggestion to the compiler. The compiler may already be inlining the function (or eliminating it). Don't worry about optimizations until the project works correctly.
You are confused. Take a look at any quality implementation of the standard library. You will find that it depends upon heavy use of inline functions to make the code easier to read, understand and maintain without sacrificing performance or efficiency.
The real benefit of inline functions [and operators] is that they allow programmers to decompose large functions into smaller functions without concern for how doing so will effect performance.
I prefer to make all functions inline functions and let the optimizing compiler decide whether to inline them or not.
Some of us prefer to separate interface and implementation, and not
worry about optimization until we know it's needed. Inline functions
increase coupling, which is usually regarded as a bad thing.
--
Richard Herring
Richard Herring wrote: 3. Compilation time considerations. Defining functions inline may require your headers to #include many more files, which can adversely affect the compilation time of everything which includes them. If the (non-inline) function is defined elsewhere, separating implementation from interface, this doesn't arise.
You need to ask yourself a question,
"Do I really care about performance?"
If you do, you will probably want to use
as many inline function definitions as possible.
You might consider taking advantage of both
inline *and* external function definitions:
cat file.h
#ifndef GUARD_FILE_H
#define GUARD_FILE_H 1
#ifdef EFINE_INLINE
inline
double f(double x) {
return x*(x + 2.0) + 1.0;
}
#else //EFINE_INLINE
double f(double x);
#endif//EFINE_INLINE
#endif//GUARD_FILE_H
cat file.cc
#undef EFINE_INLINE
#include "file.h"
double f(double x) {
return x*(x + 2.0) + 1.0;
}
g++ -DEFINE_INLINE -Wall -ansi -pedantic -O3 -c file.cc nm --demangle file.o
00000000 T f(double)
This allows your inline and external function definitions
to coexist peacefully.
Use the -DEFINE_INLINE option only after you have finished
testing and debugging all of your code.
This will speed up the program development cycle
and allow you to optimize your code just before deployment. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: DJ WIce |
last post by:
Hi all,
I did make a script/css thing to replace the contextmenu on the website with
a new one: http://www.djwice.com/contextmenu.html
It works nice in MSIE, but on Netscape (and probable...
|
by: Chris Mantoulidis |
last post by:
I am not clear with the use of the keyword inline... I believe you add
it do a function when you implement the function inside the header
file where the class is stored...
But is that all? What...
|
by: Richard Hayden |
last post by:
Hi,
I have the following code:
/******************************** file1.c
#include <iostream>
extern void dummy();
inline int testfunc() {
|
by: Grumble |
last post by:
Hello everyone,
As far as I understand, the 'inline' keyword is a hint for the compiler
to consider the function in question as a candidate for inlining, yes?
What happens when a function with...
|
by: Srini |
last post by:
Hello,
Rules for inline functions say that they have to be defined in the same
compilation unit as their declarations. For class member functions this
means that the inline member functions must...
|
by: RainBow |
last post by:
Greetings!!
I introduced the so-called "thin-template" pattern for controlling the
code bloat caused due to template usage.
However, one of the functions in the template happens to be virtual...
|
by: sam_cit |
last post by:
Hi Everyone,
I have few questions on inline functions, when i declare a function as
inline, is it for sure that the compiler would replace the function
call with the actual body of the function?...
|
by: Barry |
last post by:
Hi, group
First, I write same cases I've already known, I don't concern that
specific compiler really do inline or not.
Please check them if they are right, and add the cases I miss
1.
//...
|
by: Barry |
last post by:
Hi, group
First, I write same cases I've already known, I don't concern that
specific compiler really do inline or not.
Please check them if they are right, and add the cases I miss
1.
//...
|
by: Martin Wells |
last post by:
Is there anything like __inline_is_supported to indicate whether a
certain C compiler supports inline?
I'm writing my code as fully portable C89, but I want to use inline.
Martin
|
by: emmanuelkatto |
last post by:
Hi All, I am Emmanuel katto from Uganda. I want to ask what challenges you've faced while migrating a website to cloud.
Please let me know.
Thanks!
Emmanuel
|
by: BarryA |
last post by:
What are the essential steps and strategies outlined in the Data Structures and Algorithms (DSA) roadmap for aspiring data scientists? How can individuals effectively utilize this roadmap to progress...
|
by: Sonnysonu |
last post by:
This is the data of csv file
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
2 3
2 3
3
the lengths should be different i have to store the data by column-wise with in the specific length.
suppose the i have to...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID:
1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration.
2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing,...
| |