Hiya,
> OK, this may be a dumb question, but why are the
> PEEK/POKE functions inline?
If they're single line functions, then thats why;
eliminate function call overhead.
> Would anything terrible happen if they weren't?
If they were defined as an inline function rather
than a macro, then you'd get both types depending
on compiler optimization; function call for no,
or minimal optimization, inline for higher optimization
(I think, or perhaps you need --noinline or something
like that).
> Could I stuff them into a library, for example, and
> use them elsewhere or do I to keep #include'ing as source?
Regardless you need a #include to pick-up a macro,
inline function, or function call. So not much
difference.
You will however get a performance hit for using
functions; just try a toggle I/O loop that uses
a function (with prolog and epilog) versus the
inlined calls. Actually, there's no need, its pretty
obvious that the function call will be slower.
Of course, if you turn optimization on the compiler
will probably inline it anyway ...
:)
Cheers,
Dave
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|