Re: [PATCH][2.6.8-rc1-mm1] drivers/scsi/sg.c gcc341 inlining fix

[Andrew Morton]

Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Yeah, but doing:
> > 
> > 	static inline foo(void);
> > 
> > 	bar()
> > 	{
> > 		...
> > 		foo();
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	static inline foo(void)
> > 	{
> > 		...
> > 	}
> > 
> > is pretty dumb too.  I don't see any harm if this compiler feature/problem
> > pushes us to fix the above in the obvious way.
> 
> 
> ???  C does not require ordering of function _implementations_, except 
> for this gcc brokenness.

Well.  Other compilers had that restriction iirc, and it's a pretty natural
thing to do.

> The above example allows one to do what one normally does with 
> non-inlines:  order code to enhance readability

I always expect to find those little helper functions earlier in the
compilation unit than their callsites.  Pascal-style.  Plus you don't have
the hassle of keeping the declaration and definition in sync.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/