lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Compiling C++ modules
    Alexander Shishckin wrote:
    > On 4/26/06, Avi Kivity <avi@argo.co.il> wrote:
    >
    >> Not in this case. The constructor is an assignment. The destructor is an
    >> if () followed by a delete. In this case, the if () is optimized away so
    >> you are left with less generated code than the C case, for the
    >> non-exceptional path.
    >>
    > Relying on compiler optimisations is just as well stupid as hunting
    > trialing writespaces in a dark room miles away.
    >

    It'd like to see the output of 'size vmlinux' with optimizations turned
    off. The kernel is full of forwarding functions and constructs that
    optimize away to nothing.

    Last time I tried, the kernel wouldn't even compile at -O0, but that may
    have changed with the always_inline work.

    And it is *not relying* on compiler optimizations that is stupid. It
    means you're throwing away the work of the compiler folk, and doing it
    instead *by hand* at every piece of code you write.

    > It's almost about time to quit this thread and show us some code that
    > works. (Forked from 2.6.16, bootable on an average amount of
    > architectures...)
    >

    Ha ha.

    --
    Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-04-26 06:43    [W:4.266 / U:0.136 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site