On 28 April 2013 15:25, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:12:21AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
FWIW I don't believe this sort of patch significantly affects
debugging because that should be done with -O0 -g anyways.
Bwahahaha
You're lucky to not run into compiler
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Hey all,
Time for attempt #2!
Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
detect dead code (functions, variables, etc) and makes it easier for
the compiler to optimize; e.g., since it knows a function will
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:12:21AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
On 27 April 2013 09:06, Kenneth R Westerback kwesterb...@rogers.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10:41AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Hey all,
Time for
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10:41AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Hey all,
Time for attempt #2!
Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
detect dead code (functions, variables, etc) and makes it
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
detect dead code (functions, variables, etc) and makes it easier for
the compiler to optimize; e.g., since it knows
On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:36 PM, Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
detect dead code (functions, variables, etc)
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:36 PM, Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Adding static to internal function
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On backtrace(3) (which is a GNU thing, I know), static functions don't
show up with their respective names even though they are in the binary.
That's a tad annoying, but I am not aware of any other limitation. Can
someone please
On Apr 27, 2013, at 9:28 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On backtrace(3) (which is a GNU thing, I know), static functions don't
show up with their respective names even though they are in the binary.
That's
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:14:59PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:36 PM, Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 13:36:31 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
detect dead code (functions,
On 27 April 2013 15:38, Tobias Ulmer tobi...@tmux.org wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:14:59PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:36 PM, Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10,
Hey all,
Time for attempt #2!
Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
detect dead code (functions, variables, etc) and makes it easier for
the compiler to optimize; e.g., since it knows a function will only
called once it can inline code; or not output a symbol for a
13 matches
Mail list logo