Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cstvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!cstvax!fdc
From: fdc@cstvax.UUCP (Frank Cringle)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c,net.bugs.4bsd
Subject: Undefined static function
Message-ID: <297@cstvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 00:27:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: cstvax.297
Posted: Mon Jun 24 00:27:33 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Jun-85 10:52:28 EDT
Reply-To: fdc@cstvax.UUCP (Frank Cringle)
Organization: Comp. Sc., Edinburgh Univ., Scotland
Lines: 22
Xref: watmath net.lang.c:5387 net.bugs.4bsd:1562

Here's a question for all the C language lawyers out there.  What should
a C compiler make of the following:

	static char *tgoto();

	main()
	{
		.....
		if (tgoto(......).....
		.....
	}

In other words, we declare a function to be static, use it, but do not
define it in the source file.  This occurs in libcurses/cr_tty.c (4.2BSD).
The 4.2 compiler happily accepts this and links the 'static' tgoto to a
definition in another source file.  In this case it is what the author
intended, but it should really have been thrown out by the compiler,
methinks.
-- 
Frank Cringle, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Edinburgh
UUCP:  <UK>!ukc!{hwcs,kcl-cs,ucl-cs,edcaad}!cstvax!fdc
JANET: fdc@UK.AC.ed.cstvax  or   fdc@UK.AC.ed.ecsvax