Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:14:10 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -v2] x86: allocate cpumask during check irq vectors |
| |
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> I strongly disagree with putting variables in file scope when > function scope will do, [...]
Yes, you are right that single-use file scope statics 'could' be moved function local and are syntactically superior because in that case other functions cannot make use of it.
But I also have very good (and unfixable and thus stronger) reasons to object to statics inside local variables: more than once I personally missed 'hidden statics' during review, in one case it even slipped into a commit, so it's not a practice I want to encourage in any shape or form (even if the 'rule' is to have a big fat comment, people will just see the function local static and emulate it without the comment), for code I maintain.
It's not about you, it's about me and other reviewers: I've seen statics slipping past other reviewers as well. So it's the lesser of two evils. Can you accept that reasoning?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |