Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ll-xn!oberon!skat.usc.edu!blarson
From: blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: static functions broken in non-Unix compilers?
Message-ID: <9411@oberon.USC.EDU>
Date: 28 May 88 03:55:21 GMT
References: <120@pigs.UUCP> <126@pigs.UUCP> <138@pigs.UUCP>
Sender: news@oberon.USC.EDU
Reply-To: blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson)
Organization: USC AIS, Los Angeles
Lines: 14

In article <138@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (John F. Haugh II) writes:
[discussing ANSI c function declarations:]
> Doug Gwyn, I believe, wrote in a follow
>up article, for those of you who missed it, that yes, you must
>declare the function to have the same storage class as the actual
>function definition itself has.

Primos (Prime) C is an exmaple of a pre-ansi compiler that does require
this.  ANSI was not inovating, they were just following the strictest
existing practice.
-- 
Bob Larson	Arpa: Blarson@Ecla.Usc.Edu	blarson@skat.usc.edu
Uucp: {sdcrdcf,cit-vax}!oberon!skat!blarson
Prime mailing list:	info-prime-request%fns1@ecla.usc.edu
			oberon!fns1!info-prime-request