Fix Clang warnings #228
Open
Fix Clang warnings #228
Conversation
This file contains 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
danberindei
pushed a commit
to danberindei/glogg
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2021
danberindei
pushed a commit
to danberindei/glogg
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The reason for replacement of
class ObservedFiletostruct ObservedFileshould be rather obvious.Using
inlinein favor of an anonymous namespace is because the latter generates warnings about unused functions if the header is included in files which do not use them.It is possible to do both, i.e. define the functions as
inlinein an anonymous namespace, though I guess the anonymous namespace was used to prevent linking-issues ("One Definition Rule") and not specifically because each TU should get it's own copy.inlinefunctions are exempt from the ODR.