Hi,
procedure TStrBuilder.append(const s: RawByteString);
begin
append(pchar(pointer(s)), length(s)); //inlinetest.pas(24,3) Note:
Call to subroutine "procedure TStrBuilder.append(const p:PChar;const
l:Int64);" marked as inline is not inlined
end;
this seems to help
procedure TStrBuilder.append(const s: RawByteString);
var p: pchar;
begin
p := pchar(pointer(s));
append(p, length(s));
end;
I would personally be in favour of removing all of the inlining hints,
because they are specific to a particular compiler version and mainly
cause people to waste time on premature optimisation (or on what they
think is an optimisation, but in many cases slows down things due to
increased instruction cache pressure).
After updating from 3.1 to 3.3 I only have to look at around one
thousand hints
The one-pass thing is probably the reason it now complains about all
inline functions in dependency cycles, unit A uses unit B that uses unit
A. Then unit A can't inline something unit B. Any way around that?
Best,
Benito
Am 02.01.19 um 00:41 schrieb Jonas Maebe:
On 2019-01-02 00:19, Benito van der Zander wrote:
procedure TStrBuilder.append(const s: RawByteString);
begin
append(pchar(pointer(s)), length(s)); //inlinetest.pas(24,3) Note:
Call to subroutine "procedure TStrBuilder.append(const p:PChar;const
l:Int64);" marked as inline is not inlined
end;
The compiler does not support inlining calls with parameters that cast
a managed type to an unmanaged type at this time.
Regarding the reason why something cannot be inlined: sometimes you
can get more information with -vd, but not always (and even then the
reason may be vague).
I would personally be in favour of removing all of the inlining hints,
because they are specific to a particular compiler version and mainly
cause people to waste time on premature optimisation (or on what they
think is an optimisation, but in many cases slows down things due to
increased instruction cache pressure). Especially in this case: there
is nothing potentially wrong with such a call, nor is the method in
general not inlinable, so there is no way to get rid of the hint other
than by removing the inline directive altogether (or by adding a
version of that routine with a different name that is not declared as
"inline"). This only promotes complicating code without any potential
improvement of productivity or clarity of the code/programmer intent.
Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
