3 ms·

That monomorphizes every definition, and the point of this proposal was to avoid that.

• rwmj 2y ago
  That's true, although I wonder if a "sufficiently smart compiler" could combine compatible definitions. Also note it's in a header file and most of these functions are minimal enough they would be inlined.
  • eqvinox 2y ago
    I'd distinguish here and not label one-liner "cast wrappers" as monomorphization. And then you can in fact do a lot with macros. (My definition of a "cast wrapper" is: function body contains exactly one function call, mostly forwarding arguments. Pointer offsets¹ on arguments/retval are allowed, as well as adding sizeof/offsetof/constant integer arguments, but nothing else.) ¹ this may include some conditionals to keep NULL as NULL when applying a pointer offset. I would expect the compiler to be able to optimize these away in 99% of cases, but TBH I don't care if it doesn't and I'm littering a bunch of small wrapper functions.