> -----Original Message----- > From: Joerg Wunsch [mailto:j...@uriah.heep.sax.de] > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 8:17 AM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Cc: Weddington, Eric > Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: optimizer removes volatile > pin access code.why? > > As Weddington, Eric wrote: > > > And IMHO, I highly doubt that this proposal will be approved. They > > will probably just come back to you and say that there's no need for > > it. > > Why not? Why do you think issuing a warning for something that is > known it cannot work would be rejected? If the always_inline > attribute is known to only work for a function declared inline, it > should be legitimate to warn the user about a situation where this > prerequisite is not met.
Ok, *that* proposal I can understand (warning if inline not present). But I think that changing 'always_inline' attribute to imply inline might not fly. But who knows? In the end I think you're right in that it would be an effort to get it through the commit process. _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
