🚀 go-pugleaf

Kazimir Kylheku wrote:
 > 
 > The above are ones you wouldn't want to redefine anyway.  I doubt you could
 > make a better strcpy() or abs() than compiler-generated inline code!
 > --

You may just want or need learn how many invocations of that logic occur.

Remember, I'm asking how does a hacker feel about the inability to depend on these
calls actually executing an easily replaceable or patchable code segment.
I suspect that a hacker would take your last sentence as a challenge, and
then if he/she were good enough, well who knows?

I do understand the software engineer's needs (although even in that domain I
like to think that I can readily employ the memory leak-detector tools that rely on
not inlined malloc() free() code generation).    Although while wearing my
engineer's cap, if there were really good runtime efficiency gains to be had
by inlining those calls .... well it would be a tough decision.  (and the problem
there is with my 3rd party library code where the inline/not-inlined decisions
are already imposed, either helping or restricting my leak-detector.