From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs' C: static inline considered useless nowadays? Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:10:22 +0300 Message-ID: <835ygj3rqp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874jw37764.fsf@rfc20.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10053"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Matt Armstrong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 17 08:19:16 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1okJT0-0002NC-D1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:19:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40758 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okJSu-00033M-AX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 02:19:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52184) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okJKj-0000SV-Q8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 02:10:44 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49318) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okJKi-0006sI-KZ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 02:10:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=NkH/jmE3j2BOH9STIqUrLXCUxjzeoDY6PUjsfwhh1kA=; b=j+B146vcNpHP uovggXc+YHt6TZas95AiGRuXOoxA7zopbcGWjBuVPcpGeVmN6kQ4h4dbRVbbza+lBU95rxT/QGsZQ /rYu4B88oqq1RGuQjutWKxgDxQ5GYyEdAaK++1PrLm5FbXxVt/ZlivFsgKdnnl0mzDCqTxoPh/Bo+ EWO4dDV9lxHzj1/kaKNCc9XAq+7CUppo6NG9hHZrGQ/GyBy37UXSZaUNyQHUBMCz63g5dEkYRpT6g yhBjJxhGTbPn+upgRjAmnImaV9oNCz9rzU5fgiP6e1dQlNfuiHTAbTTcQmTMCyfZYqp/efrIg4lgd 841+VSlTgj2xBKAIunAovw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=1918 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okJKa-0004A3-Tz; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 02:10:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <874jw37764.fsf@rfc20.org> (message from Matt Armstrong on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 15:08:51 -0700) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:297916 Archived-At: > From: Matt Armstrong > Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 15:08:51 -0700 > > For Emacs, I would think: > > a) In header files, use Emacs' INLINE and NO_INLINE macros. > > b) In .c files, use static, EXTERN_INLINE, but never 'inline' since it > does nothing. > > I'm seeking confirmation (or refutation) of (a) and (b). I'm not asking > generally, but for Emacs' C code. See conf_post.h, around line 395: it explains the issue and the expected usage of these in our sources.