From:	<ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id:	<200304121353.h3CDrGFf009208@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
Subject:	Re: %n$, *m$ and some other c99 support for doprnt.c
In-Reply-To:	<2110-Sat12Apr2003120145+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> "from Eli Zaretskii
	at Apr 12, 2003 12:01:45 pm"
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:53:15 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)]
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-MailScanner:	Found to be clean
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> > Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 20:48:48 +0100
> > From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
> > 
> > "inline" is a suggestion to the compiler. So inline functions may not be
> > inlined.
> 
> Unless we know that GCC sometimes doesn't inline (I think it always
> does, at least when you use some -O switch), this is not an issue.

I'd say it's not an issue. *printf() is hardly time-critical, is it?


Right,

						MartinS

- Raw text -