🚀 go-pugleaf

mt> Date: Sat, 9 Sep 89 19:07:32 PDT
mt> From: tiemann@Sun.COM (Michael Tiemann)
mt> Reply-To: tiemann@lurch.stanford.edu

mt>    Date: Sat, 9 Sep 89 16:51:31 PDT
mt>    From: keffer@sperm.ocean.washington.edu (Tom Keffer)

mt>    Michael,

mt> 	   This goes back to an earlier discussion we had as to whether
mt>    -finline-functions should be the default.  Consider the following:

mt>    #ifdef DEBUG
mt>    #define Inline static
mt>    #else
mt>    #define Inline inline

mt>    class Foo {
mt> 	   void bar();
mt>    };

mt>    Inline bar() { /* a definition */ }


mt> Is what you really mean ``Inline void Foo::bar ();''.

Yes, of course.  Sorry.

mt> If so I don't
mt> see a problem with just #defining ``Inline'' to nothing, since the
mt> return type will save your function from not having a return type.

mt> Michael

Sorry, I didn't make myself very clear.  All of the above code is in a
header file.  The intention is to make the definition of Foo::bar a
static function when debugging, inline when not.  If you don't make it
static, the linker will complain about multiple definitions.

Maybe there's a better way of doing this but, in any case, the two
compilers (cfront 2.0 and g++) handle this case differently.
Consider:

	class Foo {
	  STATIC void bar();
	};

	static void Foo::bar() { }

cfront 2.0 will declare an error if STATIC is #defined to nothing, g++
will not. 

Again, the cavaet.  This is being passed on from a user of my vector
package.  I have not verified it first hand.

-tk

---
 Dr. Thomas Keffer          | Internet: keffer@sperm.ocean.washington.edu
 School of Oceanography     | BITNET:   keffer%sperm.ocean.washington.edu@UWAVM
 Univ. of Washington, WB-10 | uucp:     uw-beaver!sperm.ocean.washington.edu!keffer
 Seattle, WA 98195          | Telemail: T.KEFFER/OMNET
    (206) 543-6455