http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-28
20:09:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Well, it's just an impression ... :]
>
> I think one reason is that unlike normal functions, template functions are
> implicitly sort of "local" (by neces
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marc.glisse at normalesup
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #6 from miles at gnu dot org 2011-12-28 01:04:05 UTC ---
Well, it's just an impression ... :]
I think one reason is that unlike normal functions, template functions are
implicitly sort of "local" (by necessity), in that they can have a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-28
00:42:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> To be honest, this kind of expectation is completely new to me.
Me too. Templates are about genericity, not inlining.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-27
14:15:06 UTC ---
To be honest, this kind of expectation is completely new to me. I may be wrong,
but I don't think we have anything dealing specially with templates from the
inlining point of view.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
--- Comment #2 from miles at gnu dot org 2011-12-27 13:54:38 UTC ---
Hmm, I dunno, my impression is that people expect that template'd code is, in
general "more inlined" -- templates are often used kind of as macro replacement
in C++ -- especially
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51680
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
