[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:0.135 / U:1.060 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site