roconnor-blockstream

how does a `secp256k1_memcmp` help change behaviour in other compilation units?

Oh sorry I didn't mean fixing libc. I mean that the compiler hypothetically inlining some call to libc that in turn calls memcmp, that then gets optimized. I'm not familiar...

That is good to hear.

We can make `secp256k1_memcmp`, but is solving the issue for libsecp256k1 meaningful if we don't solve it for `bitcoin`?

Still nothing prevents reintroduction of `memcmp` other than diligence.

For reference real-or-random posted a clang-query command at https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/825#issuecomment-703624238.

If we are going to whitelist standard library functions, and I'm not arguing here that we should or shouldn't, one possible solution is to write our own header of standard...

As fanquake noted in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20005#issuecomment-1205264613, this is fixed in GCC 10.3 and above.

Similarly `secp256k1_pubkey_load` is used in `modules/extrakeys/main_impl.h` but there is no declaration for it.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that functions defined in one file but used in other files ought to have declarations.