This is a discussion on Re: OpenSSL breaks with gcc 4.2 - Openssl ; On Fri, Nov 10, 2006, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote: > > OK, looks like inline calls is the way to go. Those at least have some > advantages over the existing stuff. > For gcc (4.0, 4.2 at least on ...
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> OK, looks like inline calls is the way to go. Those at least have some
> advantages over the existing stuff.
For gcc (4.0, 4.2 at least on X86) it looks like it will translate equivalent
(at a machine level) function calls into a single jump instruction with -O3
In the inline case will optimize away the call entirely so that a call to
sk_X509_new_null() ends up outputting identical code to sk_new_null().
It will not do the same for function pointers however so passing
sk_X509_new_null() as an fp doesn't end up passing sk_new_null().
So it seems that at least on these platforms doing the "right thing" will have
Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
Funding needed! Details on homepage.
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List email@example.com
Automated List Manager firstname.lastname@example.org