Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?

Am 19.01.25 um 23:05 schrieb Kenny McCormack:

In article <vmjq8b$2clu1$1@gwaiyur.mb-net.net>,
Marcel Mueller  <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org> wrote:

Not necessarily.
The header files might contain information that tells the compiler to
inline the wrapper when possible. In this case it won't succeed either.

 In that case, it's not a wrapper, now is it?
 We're just arguing over definitions at this point.

It seems so.
Inline functions are always normal functions too, e.g. if you take the address of. It might also depend on some constant arguments whether inlining takes place or not. How do you call it when a "wrapper" function is modeled this way?
AFAIK there is really only one thing you cannot do with this kind of implementation: Use an interposer.
Marcel