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 normal versions of a function in same file


On Jul 22, 2004, Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:

>> Exactly.  By removing the inlinable definition, IIUC.

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

>> 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?

Only to a point.  If the function is called within glibc, even within
the same translation unit, it would be nice to be able to use the
inline definition.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}


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