Re: md5 broken?

[Paul Eggert]

On 05/28/11 07:10, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> if it is decided to switch to "inline" everywhere, we
> should make sure it works with all the supported builds, not only with
> those that run `configure'.

Plain 'inline' has been in use for over a month,
and it builds on MS-DOS (according to the log for
bzr 104154), so it does appear that it works with
all supported builds.

The "extern inline" issue is that C99 has a different
semantics for "extern inline" than GCC traditionally did.
As long as we stay away from "extern inline" we shouldn't
have to worry about that porting problem.  (This issue
applies equally to 'inline' and to 'INLINE'.)

By the way, thanks, Jim, for fixing the signed char bug
that I introduced.  I really should have caught that.