Re: Changes in GC and in pure space

[Óscar Fuentes]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> How portable is "INLINE" (and if it's portable enough, why do we use a
>> macro for it)?  If some platforms don't support it, and these macros
>> become non-inline functions, those platforms will be punished by this
>> kind of changes.
>
> I'm not sure if replacing INLINE with nothing at all would lead to much
> worse code.  Obviously, in some cases it will, but the optimizer should
> generally still inline them anyway.

At least in the C++ world, `inline' is used for putting function
definitions on headers, not for inlining.

There is a consensus from many years ago that the compiler is expected
to do the right thing wrt inlining irrespectively of the presence or
ausence of the keyword, the same way `register` is no longer used for
overriding the compiler's register allocation system.