I'm not subscribed to this list, I just noticed this discussion while browsing around... Don't know if the list accept non-subscriber messages either, but let's see:
Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > codesearch.google.com finds about 6000 uses of "extern line" in > code written in C, but the search > inline -static -extern -# lang:c file:\.c$ > finds only 100 occurrences (...) Because you don't search for "inline" declarations with no "static" nor "extern", but files with "inline" which contain no "static" nor "extern" _anywhere_ in the file, if I understand codesearch correctly. One wish for whatever happens with "inline": Please document what #if tests one should put in a portable (non-GNU:-) program in order to (a) get the intended operation of gcc 'inline' and (b) not drown the program's users in warning messages. In this regard, 'inline' which behaves differently with -std=c99 and gnu99 will make for a more complicated test. So will introducing the change - even just the default warning - in many branches at once. A new -Wno-inline-warning option would not help either, since older gcc versions will complain about the new option. Maybe you should #define __gcc_gnu_inline__ and __gcc_c99_inline__ as the proper attribute/keyword so that a program can #ifdef on them. I wonder what "-pedantic" should do about "inline"? I've seen many people use "-pedantic" without "-std"/"-ansi", because on many systems the latter break some header files. -- Regards, Hallvard
