Brian J. Tarricone wrote: >>>I was wondering how you were able to build libexo, because it also uses >>>G_INLINE_FUNC. Nevertheless, its outdated. > > Didn't we talk about G_INLINE_FUNC a loooong time ago about my use of it > in Xfce and decide that we shouldn't do it? At any rate, it would have > worked ok with glib 2.2 (or maybe 2.4, don't remember), but glib 2.4 (or > 2.6) changed how G_INLINE_FUNC is defined, and broke a lot of things. I > filed a bug on gnome bugzilla about it, but they basically said "you > shouldn't be using G_INLINE_FUNC for stuff like that". I think I asked > what it was for, then, but I didn't get much of an answer.
It works with 2.4 and below, and broke with 2.6.0. This was fixed with 2.6.4, see: http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/glib/glib/gutils.h?rev=1.30.2.1&view=markup > So, yeah... don't use G_INLINE_FUNC. The fact that its behavior is > different between glib versions is more than enough to make using it > undesirable. The way it was used in Xfce was wrong (it was used as a replacement for "static inline", which it isn't, and there's actually no absolute need to declare a "static" function as "inline" either, as modern compilers will automatically inline small "static" functions where appropriate). G_INLINE_FUNC is used to provide inline versions of library functions, while still providing an implementation of the function within the library. > -brian Benedikt _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing list Thunar-dev@xfce.org http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
