From nobody Wed Aug 13 18:11:39 2025 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4c2GfP6VB2z64HyJ for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:11:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4c2GfP4Cfxz45SG; Wed, 13 Aug 2025 18:11:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.18.1/8.18.1) with ESMTP id 57DIBdat011641; Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:11:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 troutmask.apl.washington.edu 57DIBdat011641 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=troutmask.apl.washington.edu; s=troutmask; t=1755108699; bh=QcJd13d2VCl8g7Tvm64k6mR3ugnh+/PXpA0xBHmdAww=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VT5C9beMC+G7jUxhHbLsgaLxm3V9m3z1oIoRHSnEU/TD6p4glXItA6pYShV3z+Kkj 8JjyPeKCZnI6XMiSBfSf48OAJyBEBMf6DAxYo1n0Ttg5DbCm8zMm8jBhtWDUIGjJwQ I6+hrmPQtz3egxMvrzDOr/r5jxQudfmE6TKiVsxaYn7k5s8JFfmZ5vYYExyhv2rLmr wBNQJ2P6UPMXzgG/8V38CiCgpUZCfSa7TxGkk5sCjz6Dse0dzwf5pozGqHq76hkzYm nxvzfWOHll/JP+MZqUvD3/1L0Txc+5ETW4u72Z19bdI0F3k9C4x/obfmo5FKZvhIti t4f2bO1jft9gA== Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.18.1/8.18.1/Submit) id 57DIBdYH011640; Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:11:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 11:11:39 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: Dimitry Andric Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: a question about style(9) and inline Message-ID: Reply-To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu References: List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4c2GfP4Cfxz45SG X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:73, ipnet:128.95.0.0/16, country:US] On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 07:48:00PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 13 Aug 2025, at 19:31, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > > In looking at lib/msun/math_private, one finds > > > > static __inline float complex > > static __inline double complex > > static __inline long double complex > > static inline double > > static inline float > > static inline long double > > static __inline int > > static __inline int > > static __inline int > > static inline int32_t > > static inline int32_t > > > > style(9) seems to not contain any preference with respect > > to __inline versus inline. As a matter of consistency, > > I would like to use whatever is the preferred keyword. > > So, which should be used? > > In , __inline is defined such that the keyword is removed > if the compiler doesn't support it. I doubt it is possible to compile > FreeBSD which such a compiler, so the whole __inline define now seems > only necessary for backwards compatibility's sake. Since plain inline is > already used in libm, it does not really make sense to use __inline > anymore, in my opinion. cdefs.h was removed from all msun sources except x86/fenv.h (circa 2024). AFAICT, cdefs.h is not needed in x86/fenv.h. Following Warner's email, I'll use inline and clean up math_private.h. -- Steve