A couple of more points on this unusual policy of avoiding static functions:
1) Wouldn't it make more sense for the debugger vendor to fix their bug rather
than endlessly code around it?
2) If static functions are not banned, then why are they getting removed?
I view it as an unsound engineering practice and unprofessional behavior for
employees of Intel to drive static functions out of an
important open source project because of a problem with some unnamed tool
vendor. What other open source project solves debugger
problems this way? Where else in the world is use of static functions banned
discouraged in modern C code? The more UEFI code
differs from mainstream C code, the more difficult it is to get new engineers
interested in developing it.
Actually I think this debugger problem is an urban legend. Debuggers generally
process Microsoft PDB files using code supplied by
Microsoft. If either the PDB contents or the Microsoft supplied processing code
had a problem, it would likely show up everywhere
Microsoft build tools are used.
Thanks,
Scott
From: Qiu, Shumin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 09:40 PM
To: Carsey, Jaben
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [edk2] [Patch]ShellPkg: Remove 'STATIC' from function declarations to
avoid source level debugging problem
Hi Jaben,
Can you help to review this patch? Internal linkage (ie. STATIC) functions have
caused problems with source level debugging before,
so we generally avoid STATIC in ShellPkg.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Qiu Shumin <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
Thanks
Shumin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.
Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
