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) 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 certain >>> function. >> >> In general we don't lik this because it makes things harder to debug. >> For libraries, yes, but for programs, no. > > Isn't that rule only for the kernel? ddb can only see global symbols, > but gdb should work fine in userland. Certainly I can set breakpoints > on static functions, even when compiled without -g. 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 enlighten me? Thanks, Franco
