Hi Mike,
On 29-12-12 18:03, Mike K wrote:
And isn't this the point to having a library?...to have blocks of code that get called over and over without taking up additional space? Seems odd to me to have blocks of code that get repeated, especially since they aren't time sensitive.
Depends! True when the expanded code of an inline block is larger than of call/return + parameter passing. Parameter passing is different for constants and variables, so inline can be fine in one situation but not in another.
.. the code and data memory used is smallest with no "inline"s: regular compile, with inlines: 866 program, 36 data regular compile, w/o inlines: 483 program, 35 data compile no-reuse, with inlines: 873 program, 88 data compile no-reuse, w/oinlines: 483 program, 43 data I favor removing the "inline"s.
The difference is much bigger than I expected! Would you mind to send me your program (by personal mail) for analysis?
Regards, Rob. -- R. Hamerling, Netherlands --- http://www.robh.nl -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
