gcc inline link error Wading River New York

Address 71 Crestwood Dr, Shirley, NY 11967
Phone (917) 993-4942
Website Link

gcc inline link error Wading River, New York

The `-std' options specifying some version of ISO C have the same effects as `-ansi', except that features that were not in ISO C89 but are in the specified version (for protoize4 Only meaningful in line-wrapping mode. protoize5 Print (on standard error output) the commands executed to run the stages of compilation. Even though the variables were all in completely separate scopes, they all got individual space on the stack over the whole lifetime of the function, causing an explosion of stack-space.

Have there been some changes on clang that broke this code ? –alecail Oct 11 '12 at 19:26 Probably because you were using GCC or LLVM-GCC before. That, together with the fact that gcc's notion of "large" is completely undefined (for a while, it had absolutely nothing to do with size, but with what kinds of things the In general GCC cannot say how a call > argument may affect optimization if the function was inlined, so the > size estimates are done with just looking at the function They are broken as hell (the e1000 is apparently because it builds structs on the stack that should all be "static const", for example), but they are different from something like

These include all ISO C89 and C99 features, as well as features from the Single Unix Specification and some BSD and GNU extensions. protoize8 Warn when a derived class function declaration may be an error in defining a virtual function. It causes problems in many different ways. A feature to report any failure to conform to ISO C might be useful in some instances, but would require considerable additional work and would be quite different from `-pedantic'.

The thing is, the inlining thing is a separate issue. As a result, we really couldn't afford to let gcc make any inlining decisions, because the compiler was simply *broken*. If that function calls a non-existent function, then you may get a link time error. Some options control the preprocessor and others the compiler itself.

So quite frankly, my preferred optimization would be: - Heavily discourage gcc from inlining functions that aren't marked "inline". how can you tell if the engine is not brand new? It is either like -N8 by default or like -N7 by default. Some compilers ignore it completely.

The GNU C++ Standard Library uses built-in functions to implement many functions (like -l0), so that you automatically get efficient code. This option might be removed in a future release of G++. Because then they are _our_ mistakes, not some random compiler version that throws a dice! Actually, stack growth is the one that ends up being a correctness issue.

This is a good work around (ignoring the issue of duplicate local copies of functions), except for an issue around unused code. See section `Options Controlling the Kind of Output' in Using and Porting GNU Fortran, for more details of the handling of Fortran input files. Hence to see if > it can be automated. If all of the file scope declarations for a function in a translation unit include the inline function specifier without extern, then the definition in that translation unit is an inline

So the compiler crafts an artificial name for f(int) and f(float) (this is called a decorated name or a mangled name). Ie the "inline" is where the compiler can make a subtle choice (and we need that, because sometimes architecture or config options means that the programmer should not make the choice A freestanding environment is one in which the standard library may not exist, and program startup may not necessarily be at protoize5. Most of the command line options that you can use with GCC are useful for C programs; when an option is only useful with another language (usually C++), the explanation says

And this is the source of our second problem. That's a *known*to*be*bogus* assumption. Therefore we'll get a (correct) link-time error like this: Undefined symbols: "_add", referenced from: _main in cc-y1jXIr.o By contrast, GNU C89 mode (used by default in older versions of GCC) is This option is required for fully standards-compliant handling of static destructors, but will only work if your C library supports protoize9.

Then this addresses is used in an indirect call. But the virtual table of A was not emitted since we forgot to define all virtual member functions. It's about abstraction, and a way of writing code. If these two small problems were fixed, gcc inlining would work much better.

The downsides of inlining are big enough from both a debugging and a real code generation angle (eg stack usage like this), that the upsides (_somesimes_ smaller kernel, possibly slightly faster XFS may never have been usable, but the rest, sure. And if you can seriously simplify the code by taking advantage of constant arguments, it can be an absolutely _huge_ win. Export The $PATH Variable, Line-By-Line Does a survey require an ethical approval?

Otherwise, your programs will not link. Even if you use `-fno-const-strings', you cannot actually modify the value of a string constant, unless you also use `-fwritable-strings'. This may look contrived but in my experience this may happen by accident. Thus, it is not unsual to see that a C++ program #includes C header files.

If we can save kernel stack usage, then a 1% increase in kernel size is more than worth it. > While 4kB stacks are something we anyway never got 100% working The compiler does not emit a vtable This may not apply to all C++ compilers, but usually a C++ compiler only emits a vtable when it finds a definition of a For instance class A above has two member functions vmf and vmf2. Performance critical parts written in assembler can be widely seen in audio/video codecs.

All of this only applies to C code; the meaning of inline in C++ is very different from its meaning in either GNU89 or C99. "missing" vector __builtin functions The Intel What's the cost/benefit of that 4%? That's why being able to trust the compiler _would_ be a good thing, no question about that. protoize4 Support ISO C trigraphs.

No. docid::SEC3::8 If `-Wformat' is specified, also warn about uses of format functions that represent possible security problems. And you seem to be making this whole argument an excuse to SUCK, and an excuse to let gcc crap even more on our stack space. So aggressively inlining has to be shown to be a real _win_.

To eliminate the warning, add explicit braces around the innermost docid::SEC4::0 statement so there is no way the docid::SEC5::9 could belong to the enclosing docid::SEC5::8. Explanations are in the following sections. Linus From: Linus Torvalds Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel Subject: Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:48:40 UTC Message-ID: On Tue, 26 Aug Just as an example of this: gcc will often inline even big functions, if they are called from only one call-site.

How long? 4kB used to be the _only_ choice. The new-style casts (`static_cast', `reinterpret_cast', and `const_cast') are less vulnerable to unintended effects, and much easier to grep for. Default initialization of const variable of a class type requires user-defined default constructor If a class or struct has no user-defined default constructor, C++ doesn't allow you to default construct a The resulting code is often both smaller and faster, but since the function calls no longer appear as such, you cannot set a breakpoint on those calls, nor can you change