Thanks everyone, I'm looking at this purely from a performance point of view. I just want the version that is faster. I'm assuming the context of C, and that the function does indeed get inlined. The .s files are indeed different. Unfortunately I don't know assembler well enough to tell what the difference is. I'm using the -S flag. Is there a better way to map assembler code back to C source? On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 08:37 -0500, Eljay Love-Jensen wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > > However, IF the function is inlined, no copying should actually take > > place because the arg is not modified within the function. My guess is > > that [#1] these will produce identical code. > > Is the context C++ or C? > > For C++, that [#1] is incorrect for non-regular types, and likely incorrect > for regular types. (But for C++ you probably should use a const& for the > inline function's parm, which would do what you want.) > > For C, I'm not sure, but I suspect that [#1] is incorrect. > > What happens when you test compile the two variants with --save-temps and > -O2, and look at the resulting .s files? > > HTH, > --Eljay >
