This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Redeclaration of used symbols
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
| On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 07:44:35PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
| > extern inline int t()
| > {
| > something...
| > }
| > int t()
| > {
| > something else...
| > }
|
| This is needed, so that you can include the headers with extern inlines
| when you provide definition which will be used when inlining fails.
| Having to add magic defines around each extern inline which will then
| be only used in the module providing the definition would be
| non-maintainable.
Something I'm having hard time to understand is why there is need for
two definitions. If inlining fails then why can't we generate an
out-of-line (weak) definition for that function?
-- Gaby