[LLVMdev] inlining hint

[Dale Johannesen]

You may have noticed I added an "inlinehint" attribute to the IR  
yesterday, to represent user declarations that hint inlining would be  
a good idea ("inline" keyword).  Chris and I have been discussing how  
to hook it up to the C++ FE.  Consider:

class X {
    int A(int x) {....}
    inline int B(int x);
};
inline int X::B(int x) {...}

Per the language standard, A and B are semantically identical, both  
"inline".  It's been suggested that we should omit the inlinehint on  
A, on the grounds that many C++ programmers do not know this, and  
therefore misuse the construct.   I want to get some other views on  
this.  Do you think it's a good idea?
(For those of you who consider yourselves C++ programmers - and not FE  
language lawyers, who are supposed to know what the standard says -  
did you know this?)