[Bug c/66918] Disable "inline function declared but never defined" warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 100343 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug c/66918] Disable "inline function declared but never defined" warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 Ofee Oficsu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oficsu at gmail dot com --- Comment #11 from Ofee Oficsu --- There's another example. A bit suspicious as it's related to loopholes, but GCC produces too many warning on my example and there's no way to suppress them: https://godbolt.org/z/PbnM8cfc1
[Bug c/66918] Disable "inline function declared but never defined" warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||44209 CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager --- This is an instance of bug 44209 Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209 [Bug 44209] [meta-bug] Some warnings are not linked to diagnostics options
[Bug c/66918] Disable "inline function declared but never defined" warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918
Federico Kircheis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||federico.kircheis at gmail dot
com
--- Comment #9 from Federico Kircheis ---
Hello,
I stumbled on this warning too, and would really like to disable it.
Having a defined but not implemented function can help to detect errors at
compile time since c++11, for example consider
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wundefined-inline"
constexpr int stop_compilation();
#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
constexpr int foo(int i){
return is_not_valid(i) ? stop_compilation() : i+42;
}
thanks to `stop_compilation()`, we force the user to use foo in a constexpr
context, and we can validate the parameter.
The code works as intended with GCC, MSVC and clang(!).
Rewriting the code as
constexpr int foo(int i){
return is_not_valid(i) ? throw 42 : i+42;
}
makes `foo` usable in a non-constexpr context.
In clang it is possible to ignore the warning with "-Wundefined-inline", maybe
GCC could adopt the same switch?
[Bug c/66918] Disable "inline function declared but never defined" warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918
--- Comment #8 from pskocik at gmail dot com ---
I'd also very much welcome a way to silence this (like with
-Wno-undefined-inline on clang).
My reason for wanting it is I'd like to prototype a non-static inline function
in one header (a fast-to-include header), define it in another (a
slower-to-parse header that might not always be needed), and have both headers
includable in the same translation unit.
Dummy example:
/*first.h*/
inline void f(void);
/*second.h*/
//#include "first.h"
inline void f(void){}
Unfortunately, if only the first header is included, gcc's generating this
unsilencable warning unless I drop the `inline` from the prototype, but if I do
and if I then also include the second header with the definition, then the
prototype without the inline will turn into an unwanted instantiation and
linker errors down the road.
[Bug c/66918] Disable "inline function declared but never defined" warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918
pskocik at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pskocik at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from pskocik at gmail dot com ---
I'd also very much welcome a way to silence this (like with
-Wno-undefined-inline on clang).
My reason for wanting it is I'd like to prototype a non-static inline function
in one header (a fast-to-include header), define it in another (a
slower-to-parse header that might not always be needed), and have both headers
includable in the same translation unit.
Dummy example:
/*first.h*/
inline void f(void);
/*second.h*/
//#include "first.h"
inline void f(void){}
Unfortunately, if only the first header is included, gcc's generating this
unsilencable warning unless I drop the `inline` from the prototype, but if I do
and if I then also include the second header with the definition, then the
prototype without the inline will turn into an unwanted instantiation and
linker errors down the road.
[Bug c/66918] Disable inline function declared but never defined warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- I don't think the C++ FE has this warning; it's about C99 inlines. I think this should not be a part of -Wunused-function, maybe just a part of -Wpedantic warning.
[Bug c/66918] Disable inline function declared but never defined warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 --- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5) I don't think the C++ FE has this warning; it's about C99 inlines. If not, it has a very similar warning: /home/manuel/test.cc:1:13: warning: inline function ‘void test()’ used but never defined inline void test(void); ^
[Bug c/66918] Disable inline function declared but never defined warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 --- Comment #4 from Eugene Zelenko eugene.zelenko at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #3) Does Clang have an option for this? GCC could use the same name. (The same warning exists in the C++ FE, thus it should be controlled by the same option). I tried small example with Clang 3.7 https://gcc.godbolt.org and it looks like it doesn't have such warning (I used -Weverything -std=C++11 and C++14). GCC already has -Wunused-function and it seems reasonable to extend it to inline functions.
[Bug c/66918] Disable inline function declared but never defined warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Could you explain why you don't want to have this warning really. This warning is telling you that the inline function is not defined just like static functions.
[Bug c/66918] Disable inline function declared but never defined warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 --- Comment #2 from Eugene Zelenko eugene.zelenko at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) Could you explain why you don't want to have this warning really. This warning is telling you that the inline function is not defined just like static functions. I want this warning, but I need individual switch to turn it on/off and forcing it to be warning/error. Just as any other warning.
[Bug c/66918] Disable inline function declared but never defined warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66918 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2015-07-18 CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- Does Clang have an option for this? GCC could use the same name. (The same warning exists in the C++ FE, thus it should be controlled by the same option).
