This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: -fobey-inline (was Re: gcc and inlining)
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com, dewar at gnat dot com
- Cc: aph at redhat dot com, dalej at apple dot com, echristo at redhat dot com,gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:17:50 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: -fobey-inline (was Re: gcc and inlining)
> Of course it's not defined behaviour in C99, since it's unspecified
> whether inlining will take place for any given function -- and hence
> anything that depends on inlining occuring is then by definition
> incorrect. As soon as you make inlining mandatory, these questions start
> to rear their heads.
Are you sure this is the right exegesis? I would have thought that this was improper
on entirely different grounds (e.g. that if you remove the inline completely it is
still improper).