Re: [boost] [guid] - review results? - inline missing

From: Andy (atompkins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-01 09:29:31

"Martin Bonner" <Martin.Bonner_at_[hidden]> wrote in
news:5D8503D66B71984E8D7F6651BA74D059414E49_at_yew.PS.LOCAL: 

> From: Martin Bonner
>> 
> 
>> From: Peter Dimov
>> Sent: Thu 31/05/2007 18:04
> 
>>> Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
>>>> You need to add an explicit 'inline' specifier to any function
>>>> defined out of class but in a header, regardless if it's a
> templatized
>>>> function or not.
> 
>>> I don't think that this is true.
> 
>> Why don't you think this is true?
>  
>> If you have the same function defined in two translation units 
>> (because it is dragged into both via #include), it's a violation 
>> of the One Definition Rule unless the definitions have inline.
>  
>> Apologies for the crap quoting - blame Exchange Webmail
> 
> OK.  I've fixed the crap quoting.  Now it's time to apologize for the
> crap content.  Specifically, section 3.2 [one definition rule]
> paragraph 5 says:
> 
> "There can be more than one definition of a ... non-static function
> template ... in a program provided that each definition appears in a
> different translation unit, and provided the definitions satisfy the
> following requirements."
> 
> (The requirements are met by a definition dragged into two translation
> units via #include.)
> 
> In other words Peter is right; you don't need to declare a function
> template as "inline". If you do, the only effect may be to encourage
> the compiler to inline it.

Thanks.
  Andy.