10-07-2006, 12:46 PM
Dear Misra
I seek clarification on the particular meaning of this rule. From the rule statment I take it that everything declared at file scope and only used internally should have the static storage class specifier applied.
For example the following would be a violation, ignoring the violation of rule 8.7.
however I take a different meaning from the additional description given. I feel it is more related to the mixing use of extern and static.
I would like to know which violation represents the meaning of this rule.
I seek clarification on the particular meaning of this rule. From the rule statment I take it that everything declared at file scope and only used internally should have the static storage class specifier applied.
For example the following would be a violation, ignoring the violation of rule 8.7.
Code:
int32_t var=0; /*VIOLATION, static should be applied*/
int32_t main(void)
{
var++;
return(var);
}however I take a different meaning from the additional description given. I feel it is more related to the mixing use of extern and static.
Code:
extern int32_t var1;
static int32_t var1=0; /*Violation??*/I would like to know which violation represents the meaning of this rule.