Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:26:29 +0100 | From | "Jan Beulich" <> | Subject | inline (and variants) function modifier |
| |
May I ask how one is supposed to write a non-static function and let the compiler decide whether it is worth inlining? Since all of 'inline', '__inline', and '__inline__' get __attribute__((always_inline)) attached, I can't see how I would currently do this. Wouldn't it make sense to leave at least one of the three with its original meaning?
Additionally, while on a subject like this, is there a reason attributes (as the above) are generally specified without leading (and trailing) double underscores? This way, if I #define a symbol with the name of an existing (or even future) attribute, things are going to break, whereas conventions preclude me from #define-ing symbols with double leading underscores.
Thank you, Jan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |