Re: Dynamic size spec for widgets

"Kirill 'Big K' Katsnelson" <kkm(a)dtmx.com&gt; writes: > Some time ago, Andy Piper wrote... > > * redisplay-msw.c (get_frame_compdc): gcc can't cope with this > > inline. > > (get_frame_dc): ditto. > > Could you please then conditionalize this on kind of > BROKEN_GCC_INLINE? Finally, if INLINE does not work with gcc why is > not it defined to static? Beware, INLINE in XEmacs is not what you might think it is. Maybe this is how Andy got burned. #ifndef NOT_C_CODE #ifdef __cplusplus #define HAVE_INLINE 1 #define INLINE inline #else /* not C++ */ /* Does the keyword `inline' exist? */ #undef HAVE_INLINE #undef inline # ifdef HAVE_INLINE # ifdef __GNUC__ # ifdef DONT_EXTERN_INLINE_FUNCTIONS # define INLINE inline # else # define INLINE extern inline # endif # else # define INLINE static inline # endif /* __GNUC__ */ # else # define INLINE static # endif /* HAVE_INLINE */ #endif /* not C++ */ #endif /* C code */ Notice how in almost all files INLINE is #defined to _extern_ inline, not to static or static inline as one would assume. This is so that the inline functions defined in headers work right. I think we should change it so that: * we rename existing INLINE to HEADER_INLINE, so that at least the name suggests what's going on. * we introduce a "real" INLINE macro that does the right thing in C sources. INLINE would expand to `inline' in Gcc (and other compilers that support inline the same way), `static inline' in C++, and to nothing otherwise.