Re: [cfe-users] static inline functions in headers and -Wunused-function

[Richard via cfe-users]

[Please reply *only* to the list and do not include my email directly
in the To: or Cc: of your reply; otherwise I will not see your reply.
Thanks.]

In article ,
David Blaikie via cfe-users  writes:

> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Rainer Gerhards via cfe-users <
> cfe-users@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> > Am I wrong here? What's the best path to fix this?
> >
> 
> Ish. They shuold probably just be "inline" without the static.

+1 for all the reasons David explains :-).

(He beat me to it! LOL.)

-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book 
 The Computer Graphics Museum 
 The Terminals Wiki 
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) 
___
cfe-users mailing list
cfe-users@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-users

Re: [cfe-users] static inline functions in headers and -Wunused-function

[Richard via cfe-users]

[Please reply *only* to the list and do not include my email directly
in the To: or Cc: of your reply; otherwise I will not see your reply.
Thanks.]

In article ,
David Blaikie via cfe-users  writes:

> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Rainer Gerhards via cfe-users <
> cfe-users@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> > Am I wrong here? What's the best path to fix this?
> >
> 
> Ish. They shuold probably just be "inline" without the static.

+1 for all the reasons David explains :-).

(He beat me to it! LOL.)

-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book 
 The Computer Graphics Museum 
 The Terminals Wiki 
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) 
___
cfe-users mailing list
cfe-users@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-users

Re: [cfe-users] Why does this testcase fail in clang-60?

[Richard via cfe-users]

[Please reply *only* to the list and do not include my email directly
in the To: or Cc: of your reply; otherwise I will not see your reply.
Thanks.]

In article ,
Yuri via cfe-users  writes:

> On 03/27/18 02:43, Jonas Toth via cfe-users wrote:
> > I believe the default standard did change to c++14. How did you compile?
> > Could you make a case in godbolt.org?
> 
> I compiled without arguments. Adding -std=c++11 or -std=c++98 doesn't 
> change the error message.

It looks like a bug in the standard library implementation. 1i is
supposed to yield a std::complex, but from the error message
it appears to be yielding a "_Complex int"?

I'm using this as a reference:

-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book 
The Terminals Wiki 
 The Computer Graphics Museum 
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) 
___
cfe-users mailing list
cfe-users@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-users

Re: [cfe-users] clang-format feature request

[Richard via cfe-users]

[Please reply *only* to the list and do not include my email directly
in the To: or Cc: of your reply; otherwise I will not see your reply.

Thanks.]

In article ,
Robert Ankeney via cfe-users  writes:

> Any hope this request can make it to the appropriate ears?

You can log feature requests on the bug tracker:



"New user self-registration is disabled due to spam. For an
account please email bugs-ad...@lists.llvm.org with your e-mail
address and full name."
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book 
The Terminals Wiki 
 The Computer Graphics Museum 
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) 
___
cfe-users mailing list
cfe-users@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-users