This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [patch] don't give bodies for both 'extern inline' and normalversions of a function in same file


Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Interesting.  It sounds like glibc will have to use 'static inline'
instead of 'extern inline' eventually, if not for gcc-3.5.


But this change means you can't have both the static inline and the
external, non-inline definition available in the same translation
unit, which was the point of GCC's extension.


The patch I posted should avoid this problem, too.

Exactly. By removing the inlinable definition, IIUC.

Only from glibc-internal files like atof.c. User programs would still see both.


I bet you a nickel glibc will eventually apply my patch.


If GCC removes this useful extension, there won't be a way to express
it, and the patch will have to go in, yes.

I assume this is a purely philosophical objection, as even with my patch, user programs would continue to have access to both inline and out-of-line copies. Right? - Dan

--
My technical stuff: http://kegel.com
My politics: see http://www.misleader.org for examples of why I'm for regime change


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]