PATCH RFA: Patch for extern inline in mainline
Mon Mar 12 15:42:00 GMT 2007
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 06:05:29PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > I'm not 100% sure about this change. Declaring something inlining and
> > not defining it doesn't sound like a useful extension, so if not pedwarn,
> > we should at least just issue normal warning.
> > Here I'd say we just should never warn with -std=gnu99 or -std=c99, no
> > matter whether -fgnu89-inline or -fno-gnu89-inline is used.
> I don't agree in either case. I think -fgnu89-inline should cause the
> compiler to handle inline functions just as it did for gnu89. I think
> we can reasonably discuss changing the behaviour in either or both
> cases for gnu89 mode, and thus make gnu89 and c99 the same. But
> unless and until we do that (which should be discussed in a separate
> patch), I think my proposed patch does the right thing.
Ok then. Guess you still need either some GWP's or Joseph's ack.
More information about the Gcc-patches