From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 87749 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2016 09:23:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 87636 invoked by uid 89); 9 Dec 2016 09:23:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*MI:sk:9c9c818, Hx-spam-relays-external:74.125.82.66, H*i:sk:9c9c818, H*f:sk:9c9c818 X-HELO: mail-wm0-f66.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f66.google.com) (74.125.82.66) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Dec 2016 09:23:05 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f66.google.com with SMTP id u144so2712434wmu.0 for ; Fri, 09 Dec 2016 01:23:04 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IKt5GNNYvA7vjq1DdQOcT9aOfWTs15t9V3NusUj2I88=; b=W4aJ1ys9G2OpE/+B8CwqUr8tT2mhJxIb7tgu0CQn45N9f+TaJ3qlgsSnRwUSFR/UEn o3ndLmEz1sIEmjLd/noOt5q/DIbe2KiaUBWkXc8I0mFIXtwGGNTtRiyJdRLxAxWtOhTo hNe4p50LGZQBk1+p6ryPgm68pssXFKdt1FcaTt9TZZnANQa2WpPYX8x4PcHZIQH/Xfd9 GxY5TxF3d/1p/vswf2Z5yMoCT67RDy4gi3BCEjHvh+0udlI/IFNGgrSIhsecvpYJZ+W0 sbwv6tjtT938FNH3SS1aLv8GlT76I65PV6MCzpQY3L9aKJ2axf2kNDBC5zXJeEhJ4H0p 7xMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00h0agkI5Y+wZ4i++JD7baf+u/XCQ8OC1UxXxWDhUjXrKLIL1gdCulLwvFEkgYZqQ== X-Received: by 10.28.66.194 with SMTP id k63mr6092615wmi.140.1481275382969; Fri, 09 Dec 2016 01:23:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from E107787-LIN (gcc1-power7.osuosl.org. [140.211.15.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l6sm19550857wmd.5.2016.12.09.01.23.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Dec 2016 01:23:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 09:23:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: extern modifier on function declarations Message-ID: <20161209092244.GA13661@E107787-LIN> References: <9c9c81880b49120bf90766fce93503ac@simark.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <9c9c81880b49120bf90766fce93503ac@simark.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-12/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 On 16-12-08 10:45:10, Simon Marchi wrote: > Hi gdb-patches, > > Our coding style currently requires using the "extern" keyword on > function declarations. How relevant is this today? > > I am not good at reading standards, but it is my impression that in > C++, functions are always extern unless they are declared static. I > am sure some people here know that answer already. > > If it's not useful anymore, I would suggest dropping it for future > patches. It doesn't change much, just a bit less verbosity and line > wrapping. I'd like to keep "extern", with respect to consistency. As we move to C++, I don't expect many new function declarations, instead, I expect more classes are added and used. Even some existing code can be converted to classes. In the long term, there should be less and less function declarations. -- Yao (齐尧)