On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Random832 <random...@fastmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016, at 07:23, Sturla Molden wrote: >> Ok, but if third-party developers shall be free to use a C89 compiler for >> their own code, we cannot have C99 in the include files. Otherwise the >> include files will taint the C89 purity of their source code. >> >> Personally I don't think we need to worry about compilers that don't >> implement C99 features like inline functions in C. How long have the >> Linux >> kernel used inline functions instead of macros? 20 years or more? > > Using inline functions instead of macros doesn't have to mean anything > but a performance hit on platforms that don't support them, since the > inline keyword, or some other identifier, could be defined to expand to > an empty token sequence on platforms that do not support it. It's much > lower impact on the source code than some other C99 features.
That could be a major performance impact. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
