220 8389 <1523899.dCZAEKAjYi@tjmaciei-mobl2> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thiago Macieira Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Proposal: standardize [[noinline]] Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2014 17:25:36 -0200 Lines: 30 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <1523899.dCZAEKAjYi@tjmaciei-mobl2> References: <028701aa-9798-4cd1-a77f-9fa4f9de0b79@isocpp.org> <52C6A063.10307@gmail.com> <1043beab-9a53-45af-9c02-8b74c0a65386@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1388777140 25584 80.91.229.3 (3 Jan 2014 19:25:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 19:25:40 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCB4TK757YBRBOM5TSLAKGQEDEWO7TA@isocpp.org Fri Jan 03 20:25:47 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-la0-f69.google.com ([209.85.215.69]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VzANO-0002Yr-HL for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 20:25:46 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f69.google.com with SMTP id c6sf7460946lan.8 for ; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:25:46 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=AHZ/bQyEFuEjF++knNfHre64w8HIiYshnGq9W9bMmOw=; b=eIxm5m6zajDFV8873FwgMZvPGMvE4GY4XduLi2+KOXCJj14c9vwAyrtok0Ik29G5kA 8fW8fiSYpaptrs+tLr6lG33KXGRJ3iJfXF1UrNTIqpNtj3zO2e5druyzgUc22hMoR//W zdcjZfXrMNChTMgjqVKeJAb+eP6nPghW8FNYXynUYcJT+nJ/NLVx0advKF8oOnj8TX+1 3LjGx9yTICvn8C/W+3KCZVzKQYQOlEa3xXonfkKgsGQGO4r+Dfv1rnSQF0KD36LKDDy4 xpm3m+simXhqsSQtjvo0Smh4Lr/A3HemrU+7Qc1X8I7jYYH7ud0Q54idnJqLo5YP0uL+ +rQA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlfz2R8foykfbeDk7FjfCosaN3E6aqgTMffyktNWwCUEs1GtoZuiuOqSLXr3VfVKzFbUAHF X-Received: by 10.15.45.6 with SMTP id a6mr33721970eew.6.1388777146152; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:25:46 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.180.104.231 with SMTP id gh7ls118022wib.22.gmail; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:25:45 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.61.211 with SMTP id s19mr1032653wjr.73.1388777145328; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:25:45 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from gondolin.macieira.info (gondolin.macieira.info. [2a01:4f8:d13:f81:21c:14ff:fe01:12a3]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id tn8si23510950wjc.83.2014.01.03.11.25.45 for ; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:25:45 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of thiago@macieira.org designates 2a01:4f8:d13:f81:21c:14ff:fe01:12a3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a01:4f8:d13:f81:21c:14ff:fe01:12a3; Original-Received: from tjmaciei-mobl2.localnet (unknown [179.209.204.181]) by gondolin.macieira.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BD9311B479 for ; Fri, 3 Jan 2014 11:25:44 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: KMail/4.12 pre (Linux/3.9.10-100+i915fix.fc17.x86_64; KDE/4.11.60; x86_64; git-8054221; 2013-08-01) In-Reply-To: <1043beab-9a53-45af-9c02-8b74c0a65386@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: thiago@macieira.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of thiago@macieira.org designates 2a01:4f8:d13:f81:21c:14ff:fe01:12a3 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=thiago@macieira.org Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:8389 Archived-At: On sexta-feira, 3 de janeiro de 2014 08:29:25, fmatthew5876@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, January 3, 2014 6:34:59 AM UTC-5, David Krauss wrote: > > Synthetic benchmarks don't sound like a valid use case. Anyway inlining > > isn't the enemy; constant propagation is. A whole program optimizer > > could determine that all call sites of a function have specific > > arguments and optimize away without inlining. > > The behavior of [[noinline]] would need to prevent this behavior as well. > Essentially [[noinline] would create an optimization barrier at function > entry/exit. The attribute can be, at most, a non-binding suggestion to the compiler. The compiler is freely allowed to ignore it, just like the inline keyword. The one thing that the standardisation will get you is that you'll be allowed to write the attribute and no compiler can complain about it. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. .