🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4614@pt.cs.cmu.edu>, schmitz@fas.ri.cmu.edu (Donald Schmitz) writes:
|From: schmitz@fas.ri.cmu.edu (Donald Schmitz)
|Newsgroups: comp.arch
|Subject: SUN procedure inlining(was i860 Dhrystones)
|
|In article david@sun.com  writes:
|>In article sclafani@jumbo.dec.com (Michael Sclafani) writes:
|>>Results for the Sun-3/60 are not reported because the data in
|>>[Presentation on Benchmarks given at Sun User Group Conference, Dec 5-7,
|>>1988 by Sun Microsystems, Inc.] uses compiler optimization level 4 which
|>>employs procedure inlining.
|>
|
|	... our SUN3 C compiler has a limited, but
|occasionally useful procedure inline facility - and the standard inline
|files have 1986 SUN copywrite notices in them.  Its actually pretty crude,

	pretty crude?  it got rave reviews in our real-time controller
	application, virtually eliminating any issue of asm-interface
	speed deficit.  You don't even have to put on your assembly-language
	hat if you don't want to since you can run "cc -S" on the functions to
	be inlined and touch up the output.

|you compile the source with a .il file (assembly code with a few special
|directives), and all of the original jsr's are macro replaced with the
|assembler for the routine.  It doesn't inline argument passing, but it does
|eliminate the jsr/rts overhead.

	Perhaps you neglected to use "cc -O" ( "-O1" is all you need if you
	want to talk about optimization levels).  Even before SunOS 4.0, the
	peephole optimizer "knew" about inline code's argument passing and
	typically optimizes the argument-passing down to *nothing*.
|
|Don Schmitz
|-- 

James Allen

Disclaimer: I am not authorized to speak for Sun, but hopefully they won't
object if it's complimentary material.	:-)