Unified mixture of unnamed namespace and static. #28259

Previously we had an unnamed namespace with two functions, one static the other not static. When briefly reading the code this might be slightly misleading and could make the reader think that not both functions are translation unit local, even though they are.

<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

<!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.

Thank you for your contribution. While this stylistic change makes sense on its own, it comes at a cost and risk for the project as a whole. The weak motivation for the change does not justify the burden that it places on the project. A burden could be any of the following:

• Time spent on review
• Accidental introduction of bugs
• (Silent) merge conflicts, either in the branch or a backport branch. Those conflicts demand further developer and reviewer time or introduce bugs.

For more information about refactoring changes and stylistic cleanup, see

• https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#refactoring
• https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
• #15465
• #26621 (comment)

Generally, if the style is not mentioned nor enforced by the developer notes, we leave it up to the original author to pick whatever fits them best personally and then leave it that way until the line is touched for other reasons.

Let us know if you have any questions.

(Also the refactor: in the title was missing, according to the dev notes)