Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> James Antill wrote:
>> That code is basically:
>>
>> extern inline size_t ustr_xi__pow2(int use_big, unsigned char len)
>> {
>> static const unsigned char map_big_pow2[4] = {2, 4, 8, 16};
>> static const unsigned char map_pow2[4] = {0, 1, 2, 4};
>>
>> ...so I'm pretty sure it's correct as is, and the version of GCC
>> used is giving out false warnings.
>
> I doubt that.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg00182.html
From the above email:
This patch makes GCC's inline function support more like the C99
support. To be precise, it implements 6.7.4 paragraph 3
ISO 9899:1999, 6.7.4 paragraph 3 says:
An inline definition of a function with external linkage shall not
contain a definition of a modifiable object with static storage
duration, and shall not contain a reference to an identifier with
internal linkage.
...as both of the declarations are "static const", 6.7.4#3 doesn't
apply.
--
James Antill -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C String APIs use too much memory? ustr: length, ref count, size and
read-only/fixed. Ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B strings
http://www.and.org/ustr/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
