I accidentally found that the Clang compiler allows :
inline class AAA
{
};
in C++. What\'s this?
PS. I reported this to Clang ma
I got an answer from Clang mailing list. It was a bug: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3941
However it looks already been fixed in recent build. Thanks anyway :)
Here's the conversation: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2011-March/014207.html
clang shouldn't allow this, inline
can only be used in the declaration of functions, from ISO/IEC 14882:2003 7.1.2 [dcl.fct.spec] / 1 :
Function-specifiers can be used only in function declarations.
inline
is one of three function-specifiers, virtual
and explicit
being the others.
As @MatthieuM notes, in the next version of C++ (C++0x), the inline
keyword will also be allowed in namespace definitions (with different semantics to inline
as a function-specifier).
It's allowed in case you wish to declare a function that returns an object of that class directly after the class' declaration, for example :
#include <iostream>
inline class AAA
{
public:
AAA()
{
// Nothing
}
AAA(const AAA& _Param)
{
std::cout << "Calling Copy Constructor of AAA\n";
}
}A()
{
AAA a;
return a;
};
int main()
{
A();
return 0;
}
Also you should notice the compiler errors (or warnings) that appear in other illegal cases, such as declaring a variable instead of A()
, also notice that the compiler states that it ignores the inline
keyword if you didn't declare any function.
Hope that's helpful.
Edit : For The comment of Eonil
If you are talking about your code above in the question, then it's the same case as I see, the compiler will give you a warning : 'inline ' : ignored on left of 'AAA' when no variable is declared
However, if you use the code in my answer but replace A()
with a variable, B
for example, it will generate a compiler error : 'B' : 'inline' not permitted on data declarations
So we find that the compiler made no mistake with accepting such declarations, how about trying to write inline double;
on its own? It will generate a warning : 'inline ' : ignored on left of 'double' when no variable is declared
Now how about this declaration :
double inline d()
{
}
It gives no warnings or errors, it's exactly the same as :
inline double d()
{
}
since the precedence of inline
is not important at all.
The first code (in the whole answer) is similar to writing :
class AAA
{
// Code
};
inline class AAA A()
{
// Code
}
which is legal.
And, in other way, it can be written as :
class AAA
{
// Code
};
class AAA inline A()
{
// Code
}
You would be relieved if you see the first code (in the whole answer) written like :
#include <iostream>
class AAA
{
// Code
} inline A()
{
// Code
};
But they are the same, since there is no importance for the precedence of inline
.
Hope it's clear and convincing.