On 9 February 2016 at 18:49, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote: > Actively redefining 'inline' is wrong for C++, where gcc has an > extension 'inline namespace' which fails to compile if the > keyword 'inline' is replaced by a macro expansion. This will > matter once we start to include "qemu/osdep.h" first from C++ > files, depending also on whether the system headers are new > enough to be using the gcc extension. > > But rather than just guard things by __cplusplus, let's look at > the overall picture. Commit df2542c737ea2 in 2007 defined 'inline' > to the gcc attribute __always_inline__, with the rationale "To > avoid discarded inlining bug". But compilers have improved since > then, and we are probably better off trusting the compiler rather > than trying to force its hand. > > So just nuke our craziness. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> > --- > include/qemu/compiler.h | 12 ------------ > 1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
Applied to master, thanks. I am all in favour of reducing the craziness quotient of our codebase. -- PMM