[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Patchset related to array functions

From: Daniel Llorens
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Patchset related to array functions
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:54:12 +0200

On 14 Jul 2016, at 20:20, Andy Wingo <address@hidden> wrote:

> I think the concerns are:
> (1) Do inlined definitions get inlined?
> (2) Are external definitions reified as well?
> (3) Do we avoid reifying definitions in each compilation unit?
> (4) Can you dlsym() an inline function?
> All these answers should be yes.  No benchmarking needed, just
> inspection of the build artifacts under different configurations.

Right. I might give this a try. But IMO neither this inline issue nor the 
stdint issue nor other things that we might want to improve thanks to C99 are 
necessary to simply enable using C99 in the source. The SCM_INLINE_etc defines 
work as they are and everything else seems to be backwards compatible. The 
fixes are more likely to happen once the C99 switch has been flipped.

> Tx, will review separately.  In the future would you mind please
> spamming the list with these patches as a thread of multiple mails, as
> git-send-email would do?  That makes it easy for me to review just one
> patch, say LGTM or whatever on that patch, then work on other patches on
> other days.  But I will make an initial pass on this mail, later though
> :)

I didn't know about git-send-mail, it's neat. It should be mentioned in 
HACKING! I can resend the patches in that format, just let me know.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]