Re: For loop benchmarks between Octave versions

[John W. Eaton]

On 06/17/2014 11:11 AM, Julien Bect wrote:
> Le 17/06/2014 16:49, John W. Eaton a écrit :

> > Does declaring is_active "inline" really make a difference?  I'd be
> > surprised if that is not always inlined when the compiler is
> > performing inlining optimizations.
>
> Yes, I have tried both, and it does make a (small) difference.
>
> The main difference was obtained by calling profiler.is_active directly
> (2.75 -> 2.26, roughly).
>
> The runtime dropped to 2.16 when I added inline.

Consistently?

Could you look at the generated assembly code and see whether the 
"inline" keyword is really needed to get this trivial function to be 
inlined?  What compiler optimization flags are you using?

jwe