Re: DocBook function synopsis

["Mitch C. Amiano" <amiamc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Point taken about #IMPLIED.

> >Also, what about "inline"?
>
> This is definitely an implementation concern.  You don't need to know
> whether a method is inlined or not to be able to use it correctly.

Given a least-common denominator approach, "inline" would certainly appear
to be excluded as purely a C++ concern of space/time tradeoff and debug-ability
which would only be of interest to C++ customers.

But for what is worth, I note that any macro system could be used to define an
interface to an actual or implied function, and the fact that "inline" happens to
have fewer side effects than a macro shouldn't be a reason to avoid recognizing
language-supported in-line textual expansion. (Do templates then become an
implementation issue?)

--
Mitch


 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist