# Kaleidoscope's implementation - possible improvements

**URL:** https://community.keyboard.io/t/kaleidoscopes-implementation-possible-improvements/851
**Category:** Programming
**Created:** [December 11, 2017, 10:48am UTC](https://community.keyboard.io/t/kaleidoscopes-implementation-possible-improvements/851 "2017-12-11T10:48:35Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 30

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![noseglasses](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex031/user_avatar/community.keyboard.io/noseglasses/32/429_2.png) [@noseglasses](https://community.keyboard.io/u/noseglasses)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2017, 6:17pm UTC](https://community.keyboard.io/t/kaleidoscopes-implementation-possible-improvements/851/30 "2017-12-16T18:17:50Z")

</div>

> [@noseglasses](#):
>
> Inlined setters and getter can be optimized by the compiler in a sense that they virtually disappear.

See also

> [@Do accessors increase PROGMEM consumption?](https://community.keyboard.io/t/do-accessors-increase-progmem-consumption/865):
>
> There were discussions about the benefits of accessor functions [[1](https://community.keyboard.io/t/kaleidoscopes-implementation-possible-improvements/851/19)], [[2](https://community.keyboard.io/t/single-byte-key-addressing-for-boards-with-fewer-than-256-keys/848/9)], [[3](https://community.keyboard.io/t/why-use-properties-instead-of-setters-getters/514)]. Apart from religious aspects of the discussion, the statement that accessors cause runtime costs appeared quite often. This is something that is hard to get out of the heads of programmers coming from other languages that do not feature function inlining, C programmers included. But C++ has its own rules. Inline functions can actually disappear from the assembly and thus from our precious PROGMEM. C++'s inline keywo…

---

_[View the full topic](https://community.keyboard.io/t/kaleidoscopes-implementation-possible-improvements/851)._