Re: Compiling C++ modules

[Avi Kivity]

Alexander Shishckin wrote:
> On 4/26/06, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/