Paul Eggert wrote:
> > what was the motivation of changing
> > 'static inline' to 'static' - other than "it's not needed"
>
> Partly so that the relevant modules wouldn't require AC_C_INLINE.
This is a bit backwards: In gnulib, we usually write the C code first,
and then put together the .m4 file
On 04/13/2018 07:03 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
what was the motivation of changing
'static inline' to 'static' - other than "it's not needed"
Partly so that the relevant modules wouldn't require AC_C_INLINE. As I
vaguely recall, I wanted to work around issues when gcc -fno-inline was
used. This
On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 04:03:45PM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> By the way, Paul, what is the problem with telling the compiler what to
> 'static inline'? In other words, what was the motivation of changing
> 'static inline' to 'static' - other than "it's not needed" - in the
> 13 patches presented
Hi Bruno,
On 04/13/2018 04:03 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
>> We use 'static _GL_INLINE' for some static functions we want to get
>> inlined.
>
> This is a wrong use of '_GL_INLINE'.
>
> There are 3 uses of the keyword 'inline' in C:
> 1) 'static inline'.
> 2) 'inline' and 'extern inline
Hi Tim,
> We use 'static _GL_INLINE' for some static functions we want to get
> inlined.
This is a wrong use of '_GL_INLINE'.
There are 3 uses of the keyword 'inline' in C:
1) 'static inline'.
2) 'inline' and 'extern inline'.
Portable use of 1) is simple:
- use AC_REQUIRE([AC_C_INLINE])
- u
