CLN + GiNaC on MinGW

[Jonathan Brandmeyer]

On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 17:12, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> Perhaps a naive question: If there is no support for weak symbols or
> something like this, then the compiler is forced to always inline whenever
> somebody says "inline", right?  How then, does the compiler handle extreme
> cases where inlining cannot be done because of recursions, mutually
> inlined functions, and other such things???

After browsing the assembly code, it looks like "or something like
this".  If a function is marked inline and emitted out of line, it is
placed into a section named ".text$[mangled name of the function]".  The
next line is ".linkonce discard"  Normal functions are simply placed in
the ".text" section.  I am guessing that the linker can resolve all of
the specially named sections to a single one, but cannot resolve that
down to an identically named function in the ".text" section.


> Only grudginly so.  But if this turns out to work and there *really* is no
> other way on that platform, then possibly.

I'll ask on the binutils list to see if there is a workaround.  Besides,
if Mr. Haible needed those functions inline for performance, than isn't
the fact that they are not being inlined, even on Linux, a bug in its
own right?

-Jonathan Brandmeyer