Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ISC.COM (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: functions defaulting to int
Summary: prototypes
Message-ID: <2302@haddock.ISC.COM>
Date: 17 Jan 88 20:35:06 GMT
References: <528@gtx.com> <7111@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Boston
Lines: 17

In article <7111@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes:
>Yes, each header defines/declares the associated macros/functions.  "A place
>for everything and everything in its place."  Note, however, that in most
>cases a macro is permitted, so if you really want the function (for example,
>to obtain a pointer to it) you have to not only #undef the name but also
>explicitly declare the function yourself (in accordance with the standard's
>interface specification for the function).

Whoa!  I thought that, for precisely this reason, the header files were
required to supply prototyped declarations even for those functions that are
hidden by macro definitions.  This is certainly implied by the last sentence
of footnote 61 in section 4.1.5 of the Oct86 dpANS.

Better check this again, Doug.  If it's really not in the latest Draft, I'd
like to know why not.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint