Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!UUNET.UU.NET!mcvax!moncam!paul
From: mcvax!moncam!paul@UUNET.UU.NET (Paul Hudson)
Newsgroups: gnu.utils.bug
Subject: prototyping trouble
Message-ID: <8810311059.AA00429@marvin.moncam.uucp>
Date: 31 Oct 88 10:59:08 GMT
References: <4518@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: GNUs Not Usenet
Lines: 37


   Date: 17 Oct 88 16:45:52 GMT
   From: "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <acorn!labrea.stanford.edu!polya!shap>
   Organization: Stanford University
   References: <8810160211.AA07329@sun.mcs.clarkson.edu>
   Sender: acorn!prep.ai.mit.edu!bug-gnu-utils-request

>>
>> why does it complain about yyy, but not xxx?  seems that there is a
>> curious bug in the prototyping code.
   >
   >------
   >char * yyy();
   >extern char * yyy(char *, char);
   >
   >char * xxx();
   >extern char * xxx(int,int);
   >-----

>   It better not be fixed! It is right!

    [Omitted justification about args being 32 bits, or not]

NO, NO, NO. I do not want the compiler to only warn about problems that
are real problems for the current target machine. If it can cause a problem
on any reasonable machine, I want to know about it. It's taken years to
clear most of the "ints are the sme as longs - since *everyone* has a Vax" -
let's try for portable code, no?


Paul Hudson 

Snail mail: Monotype ADG	Email:	...!ukc!acorn!moncam!paul
	    Science Park,		paul@moncam.co.uk
	    Milton Road,	"Sun Microsysytems:
	    Cambridge,		 The Company is Arrogant (TM)"
	    CB4 4FQ