Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [4 earlier articles] |
| Re: why not inline all functions? bje@cygnus.com (Ben Elliston) (1998-06-11) |
| Re: why not inline all functions? ayers@incert.com (Andy Ayers) (1998-06-11) |
| Re: why not inline all functions? mcdirmid@beaver.cs.washington.edu (1998-06-11) |
| Re: why not inline all functions? portland@uswest.net (Thomas Niemann) (1998-06-11) |
| Re: why not inline all functions? wclodius@aol.com (1998-06-11) |
| Re: why not inline all functions? ian@five-d.com (1998-06-18) |
| Re: why not inline all functions? hawa@celsiustech.se (Hans Walheim) (1998-06-18) |
| From: | Hans Walheim <hawa@celsiustech.se> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 18 Jun 1998 11:15:39 -0400 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 98-06-032 98-06-063 |
| Keywords: | optimize |
>> If you have a recursive function, you cannot inline all function calls.
>>
>> - Steve Pipkin
You can, but you will need a stack-structure to keep your
procedure data. See e.g. ch 2.6 in 'Data Structures and Algorithms' by
Aho, Hopcraft and Ullman. I admit that the it may only be of theoretical
interest though.
Hans Walheim
[Well, sure, you can make the runtime stack explicit, but with
mutually recursive functions I expect most will agree that the result
is too ugly and hairy to be useful. -John]
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.