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
