Hi, On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Terrence Miller wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote: > > I don't think the functionality of having single copies in case > > an out of line version was needed was ever required by the Linux kernel. > > But shouldn't the compiler that compiles Linux be C99 compliant? As "extern inline" is a GNU extension I don't understand this remark. The notion of "function marked as inline but in fact wasn't inlined" simply isn't covered by any C(++) standard, and isn't detectable by any C99 compliant program. Hence a compiler understanding this extension could still be c99 compliant (right now I don't know if "extern inline" would be a invalid c99, if it is, then see below). Perhaps you meant "shouldn't linux be compilable by a compiler which only is C99 compliant". If you meant this, then I would say no ;-) Think e.g. inline asms, which a purely (in the sense of providing nothing more) C99 compiler couldn't provide. OTOH gcc with the right options _is_ mostly c99 compliant, so in this sense linux is already compilable by a c99 compliant compiler. Ciao, Michael. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/