On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > first, there appear to be three possible ways of specifying an
> > inline routine in the kernel source:
> >
> > $ grep -r "static inline " .
> > $ grep -r "static __inline__ " .
> > $ grep -r "static __inline " .
> >
> > i vaguely recall that this has something to do with a distinction
> > between C99 inline and gcc inline
>
> No, it doesn't (there is no C99 compatible inline in gcc before
> 4.3). It has to do with the fact that inline is not a keyword in
> C89, so you need to use a different spelling when you want to stay
> compatible with strict C89.
ok, so based on that and a bit more surfing, i see that either
"__inline" or "__inline__" are acceptable variants in gcc, and there
is no distinction between them, is that right?
but in terms of strict C89 compatibility, it would seem to be a bit
late for that given:
$ grep -r "static inline " .
no?
rday
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
