Re: Compiling C++ modules
- From: Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:15:32 +0300
Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx 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.
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:26:17 +0300, Avi Kivity said:
> auto_ptr<>'s are fully inlined so their impact is nil.
Except for the punishment the i-cache takes. There's reasons why we
fight over "to inline or not to inline"....
--
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/
- References:
- Compiling C++ modules
- From: Gary Poppitz
- Re: Compiling C++ modules
- From: Kyle Moffett
- Re: Compiling C++ modules
- From: Avi Kivity
- Re: Compiling C++ modules
- From: Bongani Hlope
- Re: Compiling C++ modules
- From: Avi Kivity
- Re: Compiling C++ modules
- From: Valdis . Kletnieks
- Compiling C++ modules
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] compile error in ieee80211_ioctl.c
- Next by Date: RE: Problems with EDAC coexisting with BIOS
- Previous by thread: Re: Compiling C++ modules
- Next by thread: Re: Compiling C++ modules
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
