[PATCH] doc: don't push 'static inline'

Paul Eggert <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.sysutils.autoconf.patches
Message-ID <[email protected]>
* doc/autoconf.texi (Function Portability): Use plain 'static',
not 'static inline', in example.  These days, 'static' is enough;
optimizing compilers can figure out the 'inline' on their own.
---
 doc/autoconf.texi | 16 +++++++---------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/autoconf.texi b/doc/autoconf.texi
index faf6d97..3c559a5 100644
--- a/doc/autoconf.texi
+++ b/doc/autoconf.texi
@@ -4641,9 +4641,9 @@ solution involves code like the following.
     (sizeof (x) == sizeof (long double) ? isnan_ld (x) \
      : sizeof (x) == sizeof (double) ? isnan_d (x) \
      : isnan_f (x))
-static inline int isnan_f  (float       x) @{ return x != x; @}
-static inline int isnan_d  (double      x) @{ return x != x; @}
-static inline int isnan_ld (long double x) @{ return x != x; @}
+static int isnan_f  (float       x) @{ return x != x; @}
+static int isnan_d  (double      x) @{ return x != x; @}
+static int isnan_ld (long double x) @{ return x != x; @}
 #endif
 
 #ifndef isinf
@@ -4651,18 +4651,16 @@ static inline int isnan_ld (long double x) @{ return x != x; @}
     (sizeof (x) == sizeof (long double) ? isinf_ld (x) \
      : sizeof (x) == sizeof (double) ? isinf_d (x) \
      : isinf_f (x))
-static inline int isinf_f  (float       x)
+static int isinf_f  (float       x)
 @{ return !isnan (x) && isnan (x - x); @}
-static inline int isinf_d  (double      x)
+static int isinf_d  (double      x)
 @{ return !isnan (x) && isnan (x - x); @}
-static inline int isinf_ld (long double x)
+static int isinf_ld (long double x)
 @{ return !isnan (x) && isnan (x - x); @}
 #endif
 @end smallexample
 
-Use @code{AC_C_INLINE} (@pxref{C Compiler}) so that this code works on
-compilers that lack the @code{inline} keyword.  Some optimizing
-compilers mishandle these definitions, but systems with that bug
+Some optimizing compilers mishandle these definitions, but systems with that bug
 typically have many other floating point corner-case compliance problems
 anyway, so it's probably not worth worrying about.
 
-- 
1.7.11.7
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.