Fix potential ODR violation#173
Closed
shewitt-au wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I think there's potential for ODR violations in "lib/include/pl/core/tokens.hpp".
Here's an example:
Shouldn't this be:
I'm new to modern C++. Last time I was a progammer for a living MVSC6 was a thing, so apologies if I'm off the mark. My outdated knowledge is what made this issue, if it is one, stand out.
I waded through standards. It seems a the inline specifier can be applied to variables as well as to functions. This would seem to remove the danger of vioilating the ODR.
I guess it's not an ODR violation in the strict sense if the definitions are identical, but to me it looks ill-formed because it violates the rule requiring only one definition of an object with external linkage — unless it is declared inline.
Sorry if the ODR claim is misleading. I'm not sure how to properly classify this.