From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21299 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2006 15:27:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 21076 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2006 15:27:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from network-theory.com (HELO mail.network-theory.co.uk) (66.199.228.187) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:27:25 +0000 From: "Brian Gough" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <17549.33104.914229.584484@hp2.network-theory.co.uk> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:27:00 -0000 To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jochen_K=FCpper?= Cc: gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Let C++ always use inline functions (patch) In-Reply-To: <9ever89ffd.fsf@doze.jochen-kuepper.de> References: <9ever89ffd.fsf@doze.jochen-kuepper.de> X-Return-Hmac: 6cd5fd2958fc40e4353d1c4667504990 Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q2/txt/msg00096.txt.bz2 Jochen K=FCpper writes: > It replaces the old test for "HAVE_INLINE" by a test for that macro > /or/ C++: > ,---- > | -#ifdef HAVE_INLINE > | +#if (defined HAVE_INLINE) || (defined __cplusplus) > `---- >=20 > This is ok, as a C++ compiler is required by the standard to handle > "inline". Good point, I hadn't really thought about that. A few questions: - what does the C++ standard say about "extern inline" compared with "inlin= e" - is it affected by the extern "C" { .. } around these definitions - have you tried this on any other compilers --=20 Brian Gough Network Theory Ltd, Publishing Free Software Manuals --- http://www.network-theory.co.uk/