Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 03:09:24 -0400 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Sam Leffler <sam@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: C99 inlines Message-ID: <20090308070924.GA39236@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <49B2B139.6010104@freebsd.org> References: <20090307103138.GA34456@zim.MIT.EDU> <49B2B139.6010104@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009, Sam Leffler wrote: > David Schultz wrote: > >I'd like the gcc in our tree to use the C99 semantics instead of GNU > >semantics for inline functions in C99 and GNU99 mode. The following > >patch implements this behavior. It is based on a snapshot of the gcc > >4.3 branch from March 2007, prior to the GPLv3 switch. > > > > Why? I can imagine it improving portability to other toolchains like > LLVM, ICC, etc. > > I'm not opposed but seems like you should be clear. My main motivation is that currently there's no easy way to use non-static inline functions that works with both gcc and other compilers. Furthermore, even GNU wants to move to using the C99 semantics by default. Once that happens, continuing to be dependent upon the old GNU inline semantics is likely to cause porting headaches.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090308070924.GA39236>