From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13525 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2002 00:41:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13506 invoked by uid 61); 11 Dec 2002 00:41:29 -0000 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:41:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021211004129.13505.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, igusarov@akella.com, nobody@gcc.gnu.org From: bangerth@dealii.org Reply-To: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, igusarov@akella.com, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/3871: -Winline misses warning X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00609.txt.bz2 List-Id: Old Synopsis: Enabled warning message is not generated New Synopsis: -Winline misses warning State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: bangerth State-Changed-When: Tue Dec 10 16:41:29 2002 State-Changed-Why: While I believe that your original example is not very good since the forward declarating a function as "inline" does not make a difference, the following snippet indeed has an example where foo() is not inlined and -Winline does not give a message: -------------------------- #include inline void foo() {setjmp(0);}; int main(int, char**) { foo(); return 0; }; ------------------------- This holds for all gcc versions I have. The assembler output clearly shows that foo() is not inlined. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=3871