[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2370) Path finding

["rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx via RT" <rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 08:57 AM 02/11/23 -0800, Raimar Falke via RT wrote:
>
>On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 07:52:45AM -0800, Per I. Mathisen via RT wrote:
>> 
>> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Raimar Falke via RT wrote:
>> > First: inlining. It is critical that this is done. Gregory uses macros
>> ...
>> > while I use the inline keyword. Both can provide the same results.
>> 
>> That Greg's version does not need to open the inline can of worms is a
>> good thing. If we do add inline at a later time, his macros can always be
>> turned into functions at that time.
>
>I'm still for inline and I would like to restart the discussion.

<Begin discussion>
Inline is very bad. It is non-portable. It obscures the difference between
functions and real inline code (like macros) because it is advisory and
not required for the compiler to actually inline. It does not optimize
as well so even when inlined, the performance is not as good as macros.
Big inline functions are an abuse of the technique, when big is big is
also ambiguous with inline in addition to the compiler issues above.

There is nothing good to say about inlining.
<End discussion>

Ok?

>Ack except s/change get tile into a macro/inline map_get_tile/.

No.

>       Raimar
>-- 

Cheers, 
RossW
=====