tradeoff

First off, I am not looking for a way to force the compiler to inline the implementation of every function. To reduce the level of misguided answers make sure you understand what the inline keyword actually means. Here is good description, inline vs static vs extern . So my question, why not mark every function definition inline ? ie Ideally, the only compilation unit would be main.cpp . Or possibly a few more for the functions that cannot be defined in a header file (pimpl idiom, etc). The theory behind this odd request is it would give the optimizer maximum information to work with. It could

What are the trade-offs between using a System V and a Posix semaphore? From O'Reilly : One marked difference between the System V and POSIX semaphore implementations is that in System V you can control how much the semaphore count can be increased or decreased; whereas in POSIX, the semaphore count is increased and decreased by 1. POSIX semaphores do not allow manipulation of semaphore permissions, whereas System V semaphores allow you to change the permissions of semaphores to a subset of the original permission. Initialization and creation of semaphores is atomic (from the user's

I'm a C/C++ developer, and here are a couple of questions that always baffled me. Is there a big difference between "regular" code and inline code? Which is the main difference? Is inline code simply a "form" of macros? What kind of tradeoff must be done when choosing to inline your code? Thanks Is there a big difference between "regular" code and inline code? Yes and no. No, because an inline function or method has exactly the same characteristics as a regular one, most important one being that they are both type safe. And yes, because the assembly code generated by the compiler will be