Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!teklds!zeus!bobr
From: bobr@zeus.TEK.COM (Robert Reed)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: functions declared inside blocks with storage class
Message-ID: <1839@zeus.TEK.COM>
Date: Thu, 11-Jun-87 16:31:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: zeus.1839
Posted: Thu Jun 11 16:31:51 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jun-87 12:59:15 EDT
References: <12570@vaxd.ARPA>
Reply-To: bobr@zeus.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: CAE Systems Division, Tektronix Inc., Beaverton OR
Lines: 23

In article <12570@vaxd.ARPA> mkhaw@vaxd.ARPA (Mike Khaw) writes:

    Given:

    foo1()
    {
    	static int bar();
    }

     ...lint complains about a "static" function declaration that
    "redefinition hides earlier one".  Is lint just being stupid about
    "static" within a block and treating it like a variable declaration?

"Static" applied to functions is equivalent to declaring them of private
scope (i.e., restricted to the file/module in which they are declared.  What
does it mean to declare a forward reference to a private function within
another function in a language which has no lexical scoping?  Where could
you place the definition of bar() such that it would be within the scope of
foo1()?  On the other hand, declaring "extern int bar();" has a clear
meaning--declaring the accessibility of an external function for the scope
of foo1().
-- 
Robert Reed, Tektronix CAE Systems Division, bobr@zeus.TEK