restrictions on INLINE statement

greka · 11.06.2004, 11:04

Does anybody know where can be found the list with all available restrictions on INLINE functions for latest C/C++ standards?

thank you.

Agregat · 11.06.2004, 12:24

3.2. par 3. : An inline function shall be defined in every translation unit in which it is used.
3.6.1 par 3: A program that declares main to be inline or static is ill-formed.
7.1.2 par 2: A function declaration (8.3.5, 9.3, 11.4) with an inline specifier declares an inline function. The inline specifier indicates to the implementation that inline substitution of the function body at the point of call is to be preferred to the usual function call mechanism. An implementation is not required to perform this
inline substitution at the point of call; however, even if this inline substitution is omitted, the other rules for inline functions defined by 7.1.2 shall still be respected.
7.1.2 par 3: A function defined within a class definition is an inline function. The inline specifier shall not appear on a block scope function declaration. If the inline specifier is used in a friend declaration, that declaration shall be a definition or the function shall have previously been declared inline.
7.1.2. par 4: An inline function shall be defined in every translation unit in which it is used and shall have exactly the
same definition in every case (3.2). [Note: a call to the inline function may be encountered before its defi-
nition appears in the translation unit. ] If a function with external linkage is declared inline in one translation
unit, it shall be declared inline in all translation units in which it appears; no diagnostic is required. An inline function with external linkage shall have the same address in all translation units. A static local variable in an extern inline function always refers to the same object. A string literal in an extern inline function is the same object in different translation units.

Это основное из C++ stnadard working draft. Есть еще несколько вхождений, но они не так важны.

**Hans Andersen** · 11.06.2004, 12:36

Why don't you gather all of the information form the latest c++ standard?
Btw, the inline and register keywords has proved to be meaningless and probably will be removed from the standard in the future.

Agregat · 11.06.2004, 12:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans Andersen

Why don't you gather all of the information form the latest c++ standard?
Btw, the inline and register keywords has proved to be meaningless and probably will be removed from the standard in the future.

Уважаемый, Ганс Андерсен, не могли бы вы мне показать документ, который предлагает убрать эти слова из C++0x стандарта.

Г-н. Казарян: http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/ тут есть draft стандарта. Сам стандарт стоит 18$ можете приобрести

greka · 12.06.2004, 11:24

спасибо, Агрегат.

2 Hans Andersen: beleive you or not - the location of "latest c++ standard" is not known to me

Agregat · 12.06.2004, 19:55

Г-н. Григорян сам стандарт продается, как я сказал за 18$
но Latest draft можно скачать, по линку, что я постнул.

**Hans Andersen** · 13.06.2004, 11:21

Agregat, o tom chto inline budet ubran iz c++ ja chital v c++ users journal a year ago. Nu dejstvitel'no inline keyword utratila svoju znachimost' uje davno.

Greka, I have year 98's standard, but it is already too old and would be nice to have 2003's one. What I suggest is you ask your boss to buy an electronic version of latest c++ standard. ...and do not forget to send me a copy of it (for the idea)

Agregat · 13.06.2004, 19:15

CUJ это конечно хорошо, но на сайте, что я постнул выше - есть нормативные документы и предложения в стандарт. Я читал большинство из них и подобного не встречал

И в догонку, там же, повторюсь, есть черновой вариант нового стандарта, что даже новее чем '03 стандарт

.

**Hans Andersen** · 14.06.2004, 15:30

ja ochen' rad chto dkuug takoj xoroshij sajt,
no vajno li gde pishet Matt Austern?

Agregat · 14.06.2004, 19:28

Да, в CUJ Остерн может писать все свои соображения, а на официальном сайте workgroup - а стандарта языка С++ все не пишется.

11.06.2004, 11:04	#1
greka Академик Join Date: 09 2001 Location: inside myself Posts: 5,369 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 18 \| 5	restrictions on INLINE statement Does anybody know where can be found the list with all available restrictions on INLINE functions for latest C/C++ standards? thank you. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

11.06.2004, 12:24	#2
Agregat Грустно... Join Date: 08 2002 Location: Там, где всегда идут дожди Age: 38 Posts: 21,717 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 250 \| 8	3.2. par 3. : An inline function shall be defined in every translation unit in which it is used. 3.6.1 par 3: A program that declares main to be inline or static is ill-formed. 7.1.2 par 2: A function declaration (8.3.5, 9.3, 11.4) with an inline specifier declares an inline function. The inline specifier indicates to the implementation that inline substitution of the function body at the point of call is to be preferred to the usual function call mechanism. An implementation is not required to perform this inline substitution at the point of call; however, even if this inline substitution is omitted, the other rules for inline functions defined by 7.1.2 shall still be respected. 7.1.2 par 3: A function defined within a class definition is an inline function. The inline specifier shall not appear on a block scope function declaration. If the inline specifier is used in a friend declaration, that declaration shall be a definition or the function shall have previously been declared inline. 7.1.2. par 4: An inline function shall be defined in every translation unit in which it is used and shall have exactly the same definition in every case (3.2). [Note: a call to the inline function may be encountered before its defi- nition appears in the translation unit. ] If a function with external linkage is declared inline in one translation unit, it shall be declared inline in all translation units in which it appears; no diagnostic is required. An inline function with external linkage shall have the same address in all translation units. A static local variable in an extern inline function always refers to the same object. A string literal in an extern inline function is the same object in different translation units. Это основное из C++ stnadard working draft. Есть еще несколько вхождений, но они не так важны. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ http://аvitya.livejournal.com Хотели, как лучше, а получилось даже хуже... Лозунг шахматиста: На каждый шах - ответим матом!

11.06.2004, 12:36	#3
Hans Andersen the mochinger Join Date: 02 2002 Location: Paranoid Android, @10:50 Age: 41 Posts: 1,894 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 204 \| 4	Why don't you gather all of the information form the latest c++ standard? Btw, the inline and register keywords has proved to be meaningless and probably will be removed from the standard in the future. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

12.06.2004, 11:24	#5
greka Академик Join Date: 09 2001 Location: inside myself Posts: 5,369 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 18 \| 5	спасибо, Агрегат. 2 Hans Andersen: beleive you or not - the location of "latest c++ standard" is not known to me Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

12.06.2004, 19:55	#6
Agregat Грустно... Join Date: 08 2002 Location: Там, где всегда идут дожди Age: 38 Posts: 21,717 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 250 \| 8	Г-н. Григорян сам стандарт продается, как я сказал за 18$ но Latest draft можно скачать, по линку, что я постнул. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

13.06.2004, 11:21	#7
Hans Andersen the mochinger Join Date: 02 2002 Location: Paranoid Android, @10:50 Age: 41 Posts: 1,894 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 204 \| 4	Agregat, o tom chto inline budet ubran iz c++ ja chital v c++ users journal a year ago. Nu dejstvitel'no inline keyword utratila svoju znachimost' uje davno. Greka, I have year 98's standard, but it is already too old and would be nice to have 2003's one. What I suggest is you ask your boss to buy an electronic version of latest c++ standard. ...and do not forget to send me a copy of it (for the idea) Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

13.06.2004, 19:15	#8
Agregat Грустно... Join Date: 08 2002 Location: Там, где всегда идут дожди Age: 38 Posts: 21,717 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 250 \| 8	CUJ это конечно хорошо, но на сайте, что я постнул выше - есть нормативные документы и предложения в стандарт. Я читал большинство из них и подобного не встречал И в догонку, там же, повторюсь, есть черновой вариант нового стандарта, что даже новее чем '03 стандарт . Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

14.06.2004, 15:30	#9
Hans Andersen the mochinger Join Date: 02 2002 Location: Paranoid Android, @10:50 Age: 41 Posts: 1,894 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 204 \| 4	ja ochen' rad chto dkuug takoj xoroshij sajt, no vajno li gde pishet Matt Austern? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

14.06.2004, 19:28	#10
Agregat Грустно... Join Date: 08 2002 Location: Там, где всегда идут дожди Age: 38 Posts: 21,717 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0 Reputation: 250 \| 8	Да, в CUJ Остерн может писать все свои соображения, а на официальном сайте workgroup - а стандарта языка С++ все не пишется. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter