[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH][2.6.8-rc1-mm1] drivers/scsi/sg.c gcc341 inlining fix
    Andrew Morton wrote:
    > Yeah, but doing:
    > static inline foo(void);
    > bar()
    > {
    > ...
    > foo();
    > }
    > static inline foo(void)
    > {
    > ...
    > }
    > is pretty dumb too. I don't see any harm if this compiler feature/problem
    > pushes us to fix the above in the obvious way.

    ??? C does not require ordering of function _implementations_, except
    for this gcc brokenness.

    The above example allows one to do what one normally does with
    non-inlines: order code to enhance readability, and the compiler will
    Do The Right Thing and utilize it in the best way the CPU will function.

    Just because you stick a modifier on a function doesn't mean it's time
    to stop using C as it was meant to be used :)


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.019 / U:5.636 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site