> I'm tempted to say that non GCC compilers don't get a macro, they
> get a regular function and whatever speed sacrifice goes with that.
> This is easier to maintain but may upset some people.
I think it's a good approach. Except that other compilers also
support inline functions... so some autoconf wizard shouls take a look.
> I'd be saying that unless you are using a compiler that has a better
> optimiser than the gcc optimiser then you can't be too interested in
> speed. Which other compilers have better optimisers than gcc?
> Do these compilers have some equivalent way of inlining functions?
There is frequently a better optimizing compiler than gcc. At least,
in the graphics lab here, people use the SGI C++ compiler (partly
bcause it's faster). There's aslo supposed to be some non-free C++
compiler for Linux (Kai C++?) whic has a really good optimizer. C++
compilers all have an inline gizmo (which I believe operates
compatibly with GCC's), so probably most optimizing compilers do have
such a device.
Andrew