On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:46:45 +0100 Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
> >On 10/30/06, Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> wrote:
> >> Attached is a small patch ("ksh93_libcmd_killglobalvars001.diff.txt")
> >> for ast-ksh.2006-09-12 which significantly reduces the size of the
> >> global variables in libcmd
> >Why do you think the global variable size needs to be reduced? Is
> >there anything especially bad when a program uses global variables?
> It's a Solaris rule: no variable or function in a library should be
> visible unless defined as an interface.
> But there's a bigger issue: any variable in a program
> will be mapped to the libcmd variable of the same name, so
> in essence libcmd steals a large chunk of user namespace and may
> cause application breakage as a result.
the libcmd coding style is for libcmd specific globals to be file static
a typical example for each foo.c in libcmd is:
typedef struct State_s { ... } State_t;
static State_t state;
where State_t and state is static private to foo.c
any global declared/used other than file static is a bug and will be
fixed when reported
I believe the complaint about these globals is the .bss taken up by
the aggregate dll/so
-- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ --
