Re: [PATCH 2/3] decrease visibility of local symbols

[Georg Sauthoff]

Hello,

On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 09:24:24PM +0000, Tim Rice wrote:
> This is another one where I think the general principle seems sound, but I'd 
> like to have more context. What's the motivation for making this change?
> 
> A web search on the topic of why bother hiding internal symbols with static 
> in C gave results that were more focused on *how* rather than *why*.

the main motiviation behind such a change basically is:

1) minimize the likelihood of possible (future) symbol clashes between
   different translation units or libraries
2) speed up linking
3) eliminate noise when using `-Wmissing-prototypes`, i.e. if your local
   symbols are 'clean', then all remaining missing-prototypes warnings
   point to missing includes or obsolete functions


Note that a global symbol definition that shadows another doesn't necessarily
yield a link error, in general.

And even in the constellations where it does, for fixing, it's way more
convenient to get a compile error, instead.


Best regards,
Georg

-- 
"No one can write decently who is distrustful of the reader's
intelligence, or whose attitude is patronizing." (William Strunk,
Jr. and E.B. White, The Elements of Style, p. 70, 1959)