From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1d575f572a099528
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-19 14:23:57 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!osa.uu.net!sac.uu.net!ash.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0902.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: "Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <mailman.1007448966.30275.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <9ujh51$k6m$1@wanadoo.fr> <3C0EF345.47BCC09@adaworks.com>
 <568ede3c.0112071202.56fc9f@posting.google.com>
 <3C13BC4A.1C1EBE8B@adaworks.com>
 <568ede3c.0112110814.1c31fd91@posting.google.com>
 <4a885870.0112131636.227e2521@posting.google.com>
Subject: Re: What is faster Ada or C?
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:23:55 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1008800619.865084@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@mosquito.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 2.3.3 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1008800626 reader2.ash.ops.us.uu.net 29073 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18128
Date: 2001-12-19T17:23:55-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Will" <wv9557@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4a885870.0112131636.227e2521@posting.google.com...
> main.cpp:
> inline int callme();
> main() { callme(); }
> test.cpp:
> inline int callme() { return 0; }
> will not compile. Tested with g++ and Visual C++

Yes, I know. As I have said, C++ requires that the definition
(i.e., the body) of an inline function must be in scope when it
is called. But you may still have a declaration separate from a
definition, which (apparently) Richard Riehle assumed was not
the case. This means that you can write your classes without
defining the inline methods, and define them separately.

This is legal:
struct a { int f(); };
inline int a::f() { return 0; }
main() { a an_a; an_a.f(); }