From 6411865147850050086 X-Google-Thread: f78e5,52112cea9d2ccd4a X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!stump.algebra.com!devnull From: hyrosen@mail.com (Hyman Rosen) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A75=2E2=2E2/8_unspecified_evluation_od?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?er=3F?= Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 05:07:58 GMT Lines: 22 Sender: mail2news@demon.net Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: <42E4EB01.9020700@alumina.nl> <42E64CCE.7030708@cs.york.ac.uk> <42E68BDD.1050701@alumina.nl> <1122649512.879866.38000@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <3l12o0F10nuusU1@individual.net> <0RfHe.2500$%a2.1721@trndny03> <3l5u7qFvrvk8U1@individual.net> <200508011747.j71HlbuC069360@horus.isnic.is> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.news.demon.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1122959290 7077 158.152.254.254 (2 Aug 2005 05:08:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 05:08:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cs.mu.OZ.AU X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id j7257wsf007555; Tue, 2 Aug 2005 15:07:58 +1000 (EST) X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:16:00 EDT X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:1600 Francis Glassborow wrote: > I cannot follow your logic. What on earth causes the assumption that > f(), g() and h() return small objects. I cannot follow your logic. How does the size of the returned object materially affect my example? If anything, since returning large objects is often done by passing a pointer to the result location to the function, it's more likely that in such a case the compiler will need to reserve stack space for the parameter ahead of time, making execution order completely irrelevant to the appearance of the generated code. > And what about optimising register/cache usage? Yes, what about it? How do the two sequences differ? --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]