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

[Jeff Garzik]

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.

The above example allows one to do what one normally does with 
non-inlines:  order code to enhance readability, and the compiler will 
Do The Right Thing and utilize it in the best way the CPU will function.

Just because you stick a modifier on a function doesn't mean it's time 
to stop using C as it was meant to be used :)

	Jeff


-
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/