Re: [Nano-devel] nanobits3.patch committed

[David Benbennick]

On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 09:30:02AM -0700, David Lawrence Ramsey wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 06:50:04AM -0700, Chris Allegretta wrote: 
> >     ... isn't worth the possibility of confusing
> >the compiler (I can't imagine making a large portion of the code static
> >is a good idea).

I don't understand how static functions can confuse the compiler.  As to
why declaring local functions "static" is a good idea, I like this answer:

        "A static function is one that cannot be called anywhere outside
        of its own file. ... Not declaring a function to be static is
        like leaving your bike unlocked.  Probably, nothing will go wrong. 
        But then, after three weeks of everything going great, you get out
        of class, and your bike is gone.  The difference here is that
        you're the one stealing the bike...
                        --- www.stanford.edu/~thehag/Cprog004.pdf page 6

pgpPt3yemEyLs.pgp
Description: PGP signature