src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h #9115
src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h #9115solebox wants to merge 1 commit intonodejs:masterfrom
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request. Looking at this, I think it may be better to move the definitions (i.e. the function bodies) of the non-template instances to util-inl.h and just leave declarations in util.h. WDYT? |
|
maybe i should merge the files into one file called utils.h ? |
ff1c6da to
90fb363
Compare
src/util.h
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should leave declarations: inline char* Malloc(size_t);, etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
changed declarations back to be inline as requested. (hope thats what you meant because here you referred to some definitions under the debated declarations by mistake so i got a little confused)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think what @bnoordhuis would like to see is declarations like inline char* Malloc(size_t); in the util.h header, as that’s where people look to see what the actual internal APIs are.
The idea of two separate files is to speed up compilation for files that need the declarations but not the definitions. |
a3e751f to
00127bb
Compare
|
added some commits, if you like the last commit (1 before last) and want me to squash it all into it then force push , tell me. |
|
@addaleax done |
src/util-inl.h
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Could you leave a blank line before this comment?
src/util-inl.h
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this change affect the warnings? This function doesn’t seem to be a particularly good candidate for inlining.
c133999 to
83c7a88
Compare
|
the build has failed but i cant access the CI URL |
|
Not sure what happened there. New CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/4596/ |
|
@jasnell is it done? it has been runing for 5 days now... |
|
@bnoordhuis ... does this LGTY? |
|
@addaleax @jasnell @bnoordhuis guys? |
bnoordhuis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm afraid I can't start a test run, the CI is timing out again.
|
@jasnell can you help us out, please? |
|
Started another CI run. Will land after. |
|
@Jansell looks like all the failing tests are simply timeouts |
|
+1 ... will land this on Monday. Sorry for the delay, ended up getting side tracked on another item after starting the CI |
|
@jasnell poke poke :) |
|
Sigh.. sorry, ended up completely buried all week. Lemme see if I can get this landed now |
|
Hmm... for some reason I am not able to land this even tho it says here that there are no conflicts. Git am is failing. Will investigate. |
|
@soleboxy ... can I ask you to please squash the commits down into a single commit, rebase and force push back? |
|
@jasnell sure thing 👍 |
Fixes: nodejs#9083 moved function bodies back src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h. Fixes: nodejs#9083 moved back to previouse commit lets hope this is the correct answer src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h. Fixes: nodejs#9083 src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h. Fixes: nodejs#9083 src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h. Fixes: nodejs#9083 src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h. Fixes: nodejs#9083 src: squelch unused function warnings in util.h. Fixes: nodejs#9083
2cf933b to
57a762f
Compare
|
@jasnell pong |
|
Landed in 35d48d3! (finally ;-) ...) Sorry for the delay! |
|
should this be backported? |
|
Only if it applies cleanly. It's a cosmetic change. |
Checklist
make -j8 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test nosign(Windows) passesdAffected core subsystem(s)
src
Description of change
moved inline optimization to util-inl.h
Fixes: #9083