Static functions

[Christoph Bartoschek]

Am Montag, 12. Januar 2004 15:44 schrieb Bo Thorsen:
> On Monday 12 January 2004 15:08, David Leimbach wrote:
> > Hello Bo,
> >
> > On Jan 12, 2004, at 7:56 AM, Bo Thorsen wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I just convinced myself it was time to remind everyone of this old
> > > feature: Static functions. I know lots of you already know about this
> > > feature, but I've seen too many places where it isn't used, so I
> > > thought
> > > I'd give a heads up on it.
> > > ...
> >
> > How you feel about achieving the same goal with anonymous namespaces?
>
> I don't "feel" anything about it - if the symbols are gone from the symbol
> table, then that's all good. But I don't believe so, the file static
> functions are necessary to achieve this. Prove me wrong :-)
>
> Bo.

Hi,

I just want to point to some other aspects of static versus unnamed 
namespaces:

- The C++ Programming Language Section B.2.3
- ISO 14882 - Programming Languages - C++  Section D.2 (Page 701)
- http://www.comeaucomputing.com/techtalk/#nostatic

Greetings,
Christoph Bartoschek