[LTP] recvmmsg(2) system call tests
Mon Nov 5 11:06:36 CET 2018
> About this statemement that you made:
> "Function signatures aren't needed when used just in one file."
> To whch I replied:
> "ARE required unless you reorganize you code to be all in the order
> of called functions preceding called functions"
> To which you replied:
> "Actually neither of that is true"
I actually answered only the part about 'static' being useless. Sorry
for not being clear on that.
> If you don't use prototypes you do have to reorganize the functions in
> the order they are called.
That is indeed true.
> Are you really questioning that? I don't want to have to explain that
> unless you don't understand why prototypes are required in some cases.
Not at all.
> If you are not questioning that. Are you ok with me using prototypes?
I do prefer to organize tests so that we don't have to use them, but I
can live with code that does not follow that as well.
> I don't mind adding static, but do realize that that will indeed mean
> that in some compilation systems the sysmbols won't be in the symbol
> table and will make debugging harder. I don't care if you question this
> statment, don't have time to explain that.
For modern enough compilers and debuggers this is not true. Ancient
tooling may loose some debugging information when functions are inlined
More information about the ltp