public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Nielsen <mn@onair.dk>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
Subject: Re: c++/10680: Inlining in inheritance seems broken.
Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 10:26:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030509102601.24176.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

The following reply was made to PR c++/10680; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Michael Nielsen <mn@onair.dk>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
	mike@thetroubleshooters.dk, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
	mn@onair.dk
Cc:  
Subject: Re: c++/10680: Inlining in inheritance seems broken.
Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 12:18:12 +0200

 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10680
 
 Is this the correct spot to send a response to a closed PR ?
 
 
 Eh, you only answered one of the issues, the other issue was that.
 
 --fkeep-inline-functions combined with -O3, or -finline-functions, causes errors in the
 STL headers.
 
 
 
 
 
 But the line you qoute, means that in reality, the compiler should generate an error when
 compiling, when someone has an inline method in any section other than private:, because
 any method defined in the public: and protected: areas of a class are meant to be reusable
 farther down the class hierachy.  (though wether an error or warning, something
 should be generated, because it does not work, when you use the definition that
 have been cited in the bug report.).
 
 The current way it is implemented, a function can be inlined in either the cpp file, or the
 header, or both, in some of the cases, you cannot determine from the header file that the
 method is unavailable farther down, this makes it tricky to export API's, or to develop using
 an api.
 
 So it may be in accordance with the language definition, but it does not make sense the way it
 is implemented.  The compiler should emit some warning, or error, when someone tries to
 access a function that (in reality) is not visible from the caller, or when someone inlines
 a public/protected function, that will become unavailable farther down.  An inline function can
 in effect cause this situation, overriding the public, and protected keywords.
 
 Of course this is just IMHO.
 
 regards
     Michael Nielsen.
 


             reply	other threads:[~2003-05-09 10:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-05-09 10:26 Michael Nielsen [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-08 13:51 nathan
2003-05-08 13:16 mn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030509102601.24176.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=mn@onair.dk \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).