On 11/14/2010 11:02 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: > >> What? What is wrong with static variables in functions? It really doesn't >> seem >> to be a good idea to make them file-scope if they don't need to be. > > They are very easy to overlook and mix up with regular stack variables and > i've seen > (and introduced myself) a number of bugs due to them. > > They also often are used in buggy ways (with SMP not taken into > consideration), so > overlooking them during review compounds their negative effects. Putting them > in > front of the function isnt a big deal in exchange. > > There are people who never overlook them (like yourself), but my brain is > wired up > differently. >
However, I have to vehemently object to putting them in a wider scope than is otherwise necessary. I agree that static variables should be used sparsely if at all (there really are vary few uses of them that are valid), but putting them in a larger scope screams "I'm used in more than one function", and that is *not* a good thing. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss