Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:8494 comp.sys.ibm.pc:13602
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!ames!lll-tis!lll-winken!lll-lcc!pyramid!weitek!sci!phil
From: phil@sci.UUCP (Phil Kaufman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: C declaration styles
Message-ID: <18359@sci.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 88 16:13:31 GMT
References: <5699@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1065@sask.UUCP> <8695@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Silicon Compilers Systems Corp. San Jose, Ca
Lines: 12
Summary: more questions on c function declarations

In article <8695@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>, mdf@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark D. Freeman) writes:
> In <1065@sask.UUCP> coleman@sask.UUCP (Geoff Coleman @ College of Engineering) writes:
> >> When I write my C functions on my personal computer, my declarations
> >> are often like this :
> >> 
> >>           void foo(int x, double y)
> >
      ...
Declarations for functions are wonderful and avoid many errors but can 
anyone tell me what the effect of the static modifier has in a function
defrinition? I have often seen the following:
       static int foofunction (int, int)
:wq