This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Roland McGrath wrote: > Is there any special reason _int_malloc et al should be static rather than > just hidden? I anticipate at some point using these routines from another > part of libc, in the Hurd port at least. Why wouldn you want to tie yourself to a specific implementation of malloc? The _int_* functions have no interface which is in any way universal and should be preserved if the implementation changes. I've changed the code to use static since the generated code uses tail calls. This can perhaps be achieved with hidden as well but for the above reasons I need more convincing. -- --------------. ,-. 444 Castro Street Ulrich Drepper \ ,-----------------' \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `---------------------------
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |