[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
| Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| | On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 11:03:50AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>>> On a practical note, are there any downsides to using this -finline-limit
>>> flag with non-3-series gcc compilers? If not, shouldn't it be put into
>>> configure?
>>
| | `-finline-limit=N'
| | By default, gcc limits the size of functions that can be inlined.
| | This flag allows the control of this limit for functions that are
| | explicitly marked as inline (ie marked with the inline keyword or
| | defined within the class definition in c++). N is the size of
| | functions that can be inlined in number of pseudo instructions
| | (not counting parameter handling). The default value of N is 600.
| | Increasing this value can result in more inlined code at the cost
| | of compilation time and memory consumption. Decreasing usually
| | makes the compilation faster and less code will be inlined (which
| | presumably means slower programs). This option is particularly
| | useful for programs that use inlining heavily such as those based
| | on recursive templates with C++.
>>
>>
| | As I read this, the code might get smaller but slower.
>
| Sure, so we have to find a compromise.
besides... I get linking errrors when I turn it too low.
--
Lgb
