Re: C++ PATCH: use C++ semantics for inline functions (defined in headers)

2013-03-31 Thread Marc Glisse
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: C++ has a much more predictable semantics for inline functions, so we no longer need to define them (especially in header files) with the 'static' specifier. The upshot is that when the compiler fails to inline a call in a given translation unit, it

Re: C++ PATCH: use C++ semantics for inline functions (defined in headers)

2013-03-31 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr writes: | On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | | C++ has a much more predictable semantics for inline functions, so we no | longer need to define them (especially in header files) with the | 'static' specifier. The upshot is that when the compiler

C++ PATCH: use C++ semantics for inline functions (defined in headers)

2013-03-28 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
C++ has a much more predictable semantics for inline functions, so we no longer need to define them (especially in header files) with the 'static' specifier. The upshot is that when the compiler fails to inline a call in a given translation unit, it keeps only one copy in the entire program,