Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I see exactly the same assembly from x86-64 GCC 15.2 with -O2 the first example in the article both as is and without `static`, which makes sense. The two do differ if you add -fPIC, as though you’re compiling a dynamic library, and do not add -fvisibility=hidden at the same time, but that’s because Linux dynamic linking is badly designed.




TU-level concepts (mostly) dissolve during the linking stage. You need to compile with -c to generate an object file in order to see the distinction.

Also, the difference manifests in the symbols table, not the assembly.


To clarify, I was talking about Compiler Explorer-cleaned disassembly, same as the comment I was replying to.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: