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?


Reply via email to