|Re: [eigen] Re: Strong inlining is sometimes ignored...|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Re: Strong inlining is sometimes ignored...
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:37:35 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=oZYjms43kluMn0aR/I4lPrzIpXiaLT7C4LutUxm6oKM=; b=U96QyDGbu58+LkmwIpqAZaXkXnhgqTAZKgHXTlvyHgBkCtukWKUFdUoZ65ygAVl9JR FxqPa9ua2J/jzpZbg/7rDSriXqNPUwK0Z74izpck6iKLuJ+SWA93NUqNV9qZvTs3LwkE Jp06Tvn1P137NV4QencE35LkQE6ndjsBuR4lA=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=wS7J6c8xW/N5IC8GmQZ6qb+nZJ8bTHNboDy9KFXEIjElA8DwiizbzUfl0INiMZWrox Y+JlFW6z99WbtqdftR/HJG/A/MidokndNF2PXwqlcHNdvc7JC4OdBtvNzL561rHY/aA2 dOlCf9e7MOnW63Y5JoEQsnHWsVAQ8ErGFImrI=
2009/10/15 Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > I just created a patch with all fixes...
>> So, I fully agree about the removal of the assert and the introduction
>> of the Length=0 specialization; I still need to be convinced about the
>> introduction of the template selector.
> That was an error from my side, again. Either we go for the Length=0
> specialization or for the template selector. At first I implemented the
> Length=0 specialization and at some point I thought the template selector
> might be the better solution. I am not sure - probably I was just afraid
> that the compiler does not automatically get rid of the dead if. I don't
> know, you decide.
OK. I have a slight preference for the Length=0 specialization,
because it doesn't add any nontrivial code, while the other solution
results in slight code duplication. But it's not a strong opinion.
Either way, feel free to push.