Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: AT&T C compilers
Keywords: C compiler,bug?
Message-ID: <9726@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 26 Feb 89 05:46:06 GMT
References: <569@marob.MASA.COM> <1071@auspex.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 14

In article <1071@auspex.UUCP> guy@auspex.UUCP (Guy Harris) writes:
- >extern int bob(double (*)()) ;
-... but doesn't say what sort of arguments that function takes.  I
-think this is legal, however.

Yes, it's legal, but it explicitly amounts to an "old style" declaration
of the "bob" function, with all the consequences thereof.

-I don't know whether it's legal C++ or not; if it is, I suspect the
-declaration says, in C++, that the function to which the pointer points
-takes no arguments ...

That's right.  Old C++ did not use func(void) but rather just func().
This may be changing toward ANSI C style, but I don't know for sure.