digitalmars.D.learn - inline functions
- Caligo <iteronvexor gmail.com> Mar 25 2011
- "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> Mar 28 2011
T[3] data;
T dot(const ref Vector o){
return data[0] * o.data[0] + data[1] * o.data[1] + data[2] * o.data[2];
}
T LengthSquared_Fast(){ return data[0] * data[0] + data[1] * data[1] +
data[2] * data[2]; }
T LengthSquared_Slow(){ return dot(this); }
The faster LengthSquared() is twice as fast, and I've test with GDC
and DMD. Is it because the compilers don't inline-expand the dot()
function call? I need the performance, but the faster version is too
verbose.
Mar 25 2011
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 22:04:20 -0400, Caligo <iteronvexor gmail.com> wrote:T[3] data; T dot(const ref Vector o){ return data[0] * o.data[0] + data[1] * o.data[1] + data[2] * o.data[2]; } T LengthSquared_Fast(){ return data[0] * data[0] + data[1] * data[1] + data[2] * data[2]; } T LengthSquared_Slow(){ return dot(this); } The faster LengthSquared() is twice as fast, and I've test with GDC and DMD. Is it because the compilers don't inline-expand the dot() function call? I need the performance, but the faster version is too verbose.
ref parameters used to make functions not be inlined, but apparently that was fixed: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2008 The best thing to do is check the disassembly to see if the call is being inlined. Also, if you want more help besides guessing, a complete working program is good to have. -Steve
Mar 28 2011








"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com>