Is "inline" implicit in C++ member functions defined in class definition

c++ class inline
Sam picture Sam · Feb 8, 2012 · Viewed 14.5k times · Source

According to the C++ specification, are the following two classes equivalently defined?

class A
{
   void f()
   {
   }
};

class B
{
   inline void f()
   {
   }
};

i.e., is putting the "inline" qualifier on such member function defined in the class definition completely redundant?

Followon question: Assuming it is redundant, for code style, would it be sensible to keep the "inline" tag, so a future developer realises that function should be inlined, and does not remove the definition somewhere else and remove the inlining?

Thanks :)

Answer

craigmj picture craigmj · Feb 8, 2012

The C++ ISO standard says:

A function defined within a class definition is an inline function.

But, this doesn't mean the function will necessarily be inlined: generally nowadays, it appears that the compiler will decide if inlining the function will lead to any benefits.

Related questions

What's the c++ inline class?

I accidentally found that the Clang compiler allows : inline class AAA { }; in C++. What's this? PS. I reported this to Clang mailing list [email protected], and now waiting for reply. I'll update this question by I'm informed.

Read More
Why are class member functions inlined?

I think my question has been asked here before, I did read them but still little confused and therefore asking to make it clear. The C++ standard says all member functions defined inside class definition are inline I have also …

Read More
Can virtual functions be inlined

If I define a class like this: class A{ public: A(){} virtual ~A(){} virtual void func(){} }; Does it mean that that the virtual destructor and func are inlined

Read More