Bugfix: making inline legacy internal grackle functions work in C codes#157
Merged
Merged
Conversation
I had forgotten that the ``inline`` specifier works differently in C and C++ PR grackle-project#139. When I wrote that PR, I had assumed the C++ semantics. It turns out that to achieve the desired behavior, we need to label the functions as ``static inline``
Contributor
|
Good catch, thanks! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I had forgotten that the
inlinespecifier works differently in C and C++ while writing PR #139. When I wrote that PR, I had assumed the C++ semantics apply everywhere. It turns out that to achieve the desired behavior, we need to label the functions asstatic inline(this works in both C and C++).I had realized this was a problem while doing something totally unrelated in PR #153