First of all, thanks for your quick answer.
[...]
(Why are you using 'static inline' on the non-template functions
in the first place? Why not just 'inline'?)
Actually, I am not. I normally use 'inline' in headers and 'static' in .cpp files. I just wanted to simplify the example, but I shouldn't have.
I'll rephrase the takeaway, to check whether I understood this correctly:
- 'inline' just makes the template function more likely to be inlined, but it is not required in a header file, like it is usually required for normal functions in order to prevent redefinition errors.
- 'static' has the same effect for templates as for normal functions, and can be problematic in header files, especially if the template or function has static variables inside.
Incidentally, I wonder how the linker detects and merges duplicate templates, or even duplicate normal inline functions. The template or inline function could have different bodies in different compilation units. A simplified example would be:
file1.cpp:
inline int test ( void )
{ return 1; }
file2.cpp:
inline int test ( void )
{ return 99999; }
I read somewhere that the standard does not require detecting the above problem. Will GCC or the linker detect this problematic case?
Regards,
rdiez
