On 20 February 2014 18:16, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
>> On 20 February 2014 15:31, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>> (I counted nearly 100 (non-debug)
>>> functions that could be made static in gcc, and 4 in libstdc++, by the
>>> way.)
>>
>> Which wer
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 20 February 2014 15:31, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> (I counted nearly 100 (non-debug)
>> functions that could be made static in gcc, and 4 in libstdc++, by the
>> way.)
>
> Which were the four in libstdc++?
>
> I only see __gslice_on_index a
On 20 February 2014 15:31, Patrick Palka wrote:
> (I counted nearly 100 (non-debug)
> functions that could be made static in gcc, and 4 in libstdc++, by the
> way.)
Which were the four in libstdc++?
I only see __gslice_on_index and __concat_size_t.
Patrick Palka writes:
>> Maybe others will disagree and will think enabling
>> -Wmissing-declarations would be a useful change, but I don't see the
>> point.
>
> In my novice opinion, I think the flag helps keep source files tidy
> and modular, and their interfaces well-defined. Its biggest benef
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 20 February 2014 10:02, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Jonathan Wakely
>> wrote:
>>> On 13 February 2014 20:47, Patrick Palka wrote:
On a related note, would a patch to officially enable
-Wmissing-d
On 20 February 2014 10:02, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
>> On 13 February 2014 20:47, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>> On a related note, would a patch to officially enable
>>> -Wmissing-declarations in the build process be well regarded?
>>
>> What wo
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:16 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 13 February 2014 20:47, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> On a related note, would a patch to officially enable
>> -Wmissing-declarations in the build process be well regarded?
>
> What would be the advantage?
A missing declaration for an extern
On 13 February 2014 20:47, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On a related note, would a patch to officially enable
> -Wmissing-declarations in the build process be well regarded?
What would be the advantage?
> Since
> -Wmissing-prototypes is currently enabled, I assume it is the
> intention of the GCC devs
