Why not make all functions inline by default? Because it's an engineering trade off. There are at least two types of "optimization": speeding up the program and reducing the size (memory footprint) of the program. Inlining generally speeds things up. It gets rid of the function call overhead, avoiding pushing then pulling parameters from the stack. However, it also makes the memory footprint of the program bigger, because every function call must now be replaced with the full code of the function. To make things even more complicated, remember that the CPU stores frequently used chunks of memory in a cache on the CPU for ultra-rapid access. If you make the program's memory image big enough, your program won't be able to use the cache efficiently, and in the worst case inlining could actually slow your program down. To some extent the compiler can calculate what the trade offs are, and may be able to make better decisions than you can, just looking at the source code.

内联是对编译器的一个建议，它可以随意忽略。它非常适合小段代码。

如果你的函数是内联的，它基本上是插入到函数调用的代码中，而不是实际调用一个单独的函数。这有助于提高速度，因为你不必实际打电话。

它还帮助cpu进行流水线操作，因为它们不必用调用引起的新指令重新加载流水线。

唯一的缺点是可能会增加二进制大小，但只要函数很小，这就不会太大。

现在我倾向于把这类决定留给编译器(好吧，至少是聪明的编译器)。编写它们的人往往对底层架构有更详细的了解。

我们的计算机科学教授敦促我们不要在c++程序中使用内联。当被问及原因时，他友好地向我们解释说，现代编译器应该自动检测何时使用内联。

是的，内联可以是一种优化技术，在任何可能的地方都可以使用，但显然这已经为你做了，只要有可能内联一个函数。

Why not make all functions inline by default? Because it's an engineering trade off. There are at least two types of "optimization": speeding up the program and reducing the size (memory footprint) of the program. Inlining generally speeds things up. It gets rid of the function call overhead, avoiding pushing then pulling parameters from the stack. However, it also makes the memory footprint of the program bigger, because every function call must now be replaced with the full code of the function. To make things even more complicated, remember that the CPU stores frequently used chunks of memory in a cache on the CPU for ultra-rapid access. If you make the program's memory image big enough, your program won't be able to use the cache efficiently, and in the worst case inlining could actually slow your program down. To some extent the compiler can calculate what the trade offs are, and may be able to make better decisions than you can, just looking at the source code.

内联函数是编译器使用的优化技术。可以简单地在函数原型前加上inline关键字来使函数内联。内联函数指示编译器在代码中使用函数的任何地方插入完整的函数体。

优点:-

It does not require function calling overhead. It also save overhead of variables push/pop on the stack, while function calling. It also save overhead of return call from a function. It increases locality of reference by utilizing instruction cache. After in-lining compiler can also apply intra-procedural optimization if specified. This is the most important one, in this way compiler can now focus on dead code elimination, can give more stress on branch prediction, induction variable elimination etc..

要了解更多信息，可以点击这个链接 http://tajendrasengar.blogspot.com/2010/03/what-is-inline-function-in-cc.html

内联函数更快，因为你不需要将参数和返回地址等东西推入或弹出堆栈;但是，它确实会使二进制文件略大一些。

有显著的区别吗?对大多数人来说，在现代硬件上还不够明显。但它可以产生影响，这对一些人来说已经足够了。

将某些东西标记为内联并不能保证它将是内联的。这只是给编译器的一个建议。有时候是不可能的比如你有一个虚函数，或者涉及到递归。有时候编译器会选择不使用它。

我可以看到这样的情况会产生明显的不同:

inline int aplusb_pow2(int a, int b) {
  return (a + b)*(a + b) ;
}

for(int a = 0; a < 900000; ++a)
    for(int b = 0; b < 900000; ++b)
        aplusb_pow2(a, b);