Jon Smirl wrote: > > If these are in-lined and marked for export, are we sure they are getting > inlined? It would seem to me that an inline function expansion couldn't be > called externally. Another alternative is that they are getting added both > inlined and as a standalone function. If this is the cause would linking > with the option to remove unreferenced functions get rid of them?
Without disasm it would be hard to know if the compiler is smart enough to inline them *and* make a standalone copy for export. Unreferenced symbol removal won't remove exported functions because we are *telling* the linker that we expect users outside our dll might want to use the methods. We are apparently paying space overhead for these in each dll. I doubt it is much since these are small. Someone might do some work to carefully trim them out. We are accepting patches :) John. > > -- > Jon Smirl > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
