If you think these things are considered harmful, I'd encourage you to read "John Carmack on Inlined Code" http://number-none.com/blow/john_carmack_on_inlined_c

If you think these things are considered harmful, I'd encourage you to read "John Carmack on Inlined Code" http://number-none.com/blow/john_carmack_on_inlined_code.html http://number-none.com/blow/john_carmack_on_inlined_code.htm... "The flight control code for the Armadillo rockets is only a few thousand lines of code, so I took the main tic function and started inlining all the subroutines. While I can't say that I found a hidden bug that could have caused a crash (literally...), I did find several variables that were set multiple times, a couple control flow things that looked a bit dodgy, and the final code got smaller and cleaner." If Carmack finds value in the approach, perhaps we shouldn't dismiss it out of hand. Also worth noting his follow-up comment: "In the years since I wrote this, I have gotten much more bullish about pure functional programming, even in C/C++ where reasonable... When it gets to be too much to take, figure out how to factor blocks out into pure functions"