Re: [avr-libc-dev] Re: [avr-gcc-list] Poll: Who uses itoa() & co with base != {2, 8, 10, 16}?

[Joerg Wunsch]

As Russell Shaw wrote:

> I never noticed, because i always write my own minimal versions of
> things.

> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/avr-gcc-list/2002-07/msg00063.html

Btw., in that case, I think even the logic behind -ffunction-sections
and -gc-unused-sections would fail: your foo() recursively called
itself, so I guess the linker would recognize this as the symbol foo
(and thus the section) being used, and thus not being gc-able -- even
though nobody would really call foo() from outside.

Situations like these are one of the reasons why I think it would be
better to leave it to a human (i.e. the developer) to rather design
the entire system in a way where he knows that only those parts of the
program that belong into it will really be linked, instead of (to
exaggerate quite a bit) hacking together whatever he just feels like,
and then hoping the tools will eventually sort his mess out.

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)