declarations in include files: how do YOU feel?

[Henry Spencer]

In article <5134 at bunker.UUCP> garys at bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) writes:
>...if a function is replaced with a macro, it is no longer in lib.a.

Not necessarily.  Standard library functions in fact are required to be
in both places.  Doing this for other functions would also seem sensible.

>Third, the size of the program increases as you replace functions
>with macros...

Not necessarily.  Calling sequences can take a non-trivial amount of
code, and they tend to interfere with optimizing compilers.  The macro
version can end up being smaller.

>Debugging is also affected adversely; ever try to put a breakpoint
>at a macro?

This is a generic problem with most forms of optimization.
-- 
Subversion, n:  a superset     |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
of a subset.    --J.J. Horning | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry at zoo.toronto.edu