Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:2577 comp.lang.c:11049
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!princeton!udel!gatech!bloom-beacon!think!ames!hc!lanl!unm-la!unmvax!nmtsun!dieter
From: dieter@nmtsun.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: lint on Altos 2000 is BROKE BROKE BROKE!
Message-ID: <601@nmtsun.nmt.edu>
Date: 30 Jun 88 16:13:11 GMT
References: <256@oglvee.UUCP> <8173@brl-smoke.ARPA> <259@oglvee.UUCP>
Reply-To: dieter@nmtsun.nmt.edu (The Demented Teddy Bear)
Followup-To: comp.unix.xenix
Organization: New Mexico Tech, Socorro NM
Lines: 28

In article <259@oglvee.UUCP> jr@.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) writes:
>
> function argument ( number ) used inconsistently
>    fprintf( arg 1 )   	llibc(259) :: t2.c(12)
>
>I still don't capiche why lint is squawking about arg 1 to fprintf!

You have a good question.  Sun's lint only complains about "defined but
not used" type things.  Try looking at /usr/lib/lint/llibc (or whatever
the equivalent is on your machine).  The one here (llib-lc) has:

...
		/* VARARGS2 */
	int	fprintf( f, s ) FILE *f; char *s; {return 1;}
...

I have a funny feeling they have "int f" instead of "FILE *f".  That's
more of a bug in the description file than in lint itself.  I am assuming
that your vendor supplies the human-readable version of the lint libraries,
which is probably a very silly thing to assume.  However, maybe you got
lucky.

Dieter Muller
-- 
Welcome to the island.  You are number six.
...cmcl2!lanl!unm-la!unmvax!nmtsun!dieter
dieter%nmt@relay.cs.net                    <-- most likely to succeed
dieter@nmtsun.nmt.edu