Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions

Kurt Harriman <harriman@acm.org> writes:
> (Does anybody still use a C compiler that doesn't support
> inline functions?)

The question isn't so much that, it's whether the compiler supports
inline functions with the same behavior as gcc.  At minimum that
would require
	* not generating extra copies of the function
	* not whining about unreferenced static functions
How many compilers have you tested this patch against?  Which ones
does it actually offer any benefit for?

			regards, tom lane