http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/inline-functions.html#faq-9.9
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Anton Muhin<[email protected]> wrote: > Dean, are you sure? > > Holy standard says: > > A function declaration (8.3.5, 9.3, 11.4) with an inline specifier > declares an inline function. The inline > specifier indicates to the implementation that inline substitution of > the function body at the point of call is to be preferred to the usual > function call mechanism. An implementation is not required to perform > this > inline substitution at the point of call; however, even if this inline > substitution is omitted, the other rules for > inline functions defined by this subclause shall still be respected. > > (7.1.2, taken from ftp://ftp.research.att.com/pub/c++std/WP/CD2/) > > I just used the same style as around (placing inline modifier and > embedding a body). I didn't embed bodies to minimize patch and as > there are some deps on stuff declared below. > > Of course, if from stylistic point of view that's preferable to place > inlines on defs, I'll do that. > > yours, > anton. > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Dean McNamee<[email protected]> wrote: >> I am not sure this is right, the inline keyword goes on the >> definition, not the declaration. >> >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:35 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Oh, Christian just pointed out to me that these methods are template >>> methods and therefore the implementation is in the header file. :-) >>> >>> LGTM >>> >>> >>> >>> http://codereview.chromium.org/159236 >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
