Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Inlining -- what happened to the inline keyword
Keywords: ansi inline
Message-ID: <10991@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 9 Sep 89 01:10:02 GMT
References: <4783@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 12

In article <4783@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> lupton@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Robert Lupton) writes:
>... I've been wondering ever since why it was killed. Ditto with
>comments to end of line // this is a comment

Literally thousands of suggestions for such "improvements" were received
by X3J11.  Unless such a proposal could be shown to address a clear
deficiency in the base document, it stood little chance of being adopted,
because the charter of X3J11 was not to invent a new language based
loosely on C, but to standardize the existing language.

Many occurrences of functions can be "in-lined" by a sufficiently clever
compiler as a permitted optimization.