https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93008
--- Comment #13 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #12) > There's nothing fake about them, they are definitely inline functions as far > as the language rules. But in some cases we don't want the compiler to use > that fact as an optimisation hint. "quasi_inline"? "pseudo_inline"? "unoptimizable_inline"? "strictly_inline"? "honorary_inline"? "inline_in_name_only"? "ceremonially_inline"?
