[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AC_C_INLINE test not robust enough?

From: Akim Demaille
Subject: Re: AC_C_INLINE test not robust enough?
Date: 28 Jun 2001 18:31:46 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Academic Rigor)

>>>>> "autoconf" == autoconf  <address@hidden> writes:

autoconf> AC_C_INLINE loops through "inline", "__inline__", and
autoconf> "__inline" to determine the proper keyword for inline
autoconf> support. These are used in the following code fragment to
autoconf> test for inline support: static $inline int static_foo ()
autoconf> {return 0; } $inline int foo () {return 0; }

autoconf> The IRIX C compiler has no problems with __inline. However,
autoconf> if a third test is added: extern $inline int extern_foo ();

It doesn't make sense to me.

autoconf> then the IRIX C compiler barfs. So, should we add a third
autoconf> test? GCC accepts the extern test.

I don't remember what the documentation says, but the only safe
portable use of inline I know is exclusively 'static inline'.

Does C99 include something about it?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]