Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!uflorida!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: varargs vs. prototypes
Message-ID: <10380@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 8 Jun 89 20:08:58 GMT
References: <237@pink.ACA.MCC.COM>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 18

In article <237@pink.ACA.MCC.COM> rfg@MCC.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>Old (non-prototype) function declarations & definitions have
>been depreciated right?  So we really should *not* be using
>the old style anymore right?  We should do everything with
>prototypes right?

If you don't care about non standard-conforming implementations,
then you should use prototypes.  Otherwise, you should use the
__STDC__ predefined macro to select whether to use prototypes or
old-style declarations.  Some clever tricks to assist in this
have been previously posted, but you can do it the obvious way..

>So how can I write a function definition for a varargs function
>using prototypes?  Is this possible?

#include <stdarg.h>
ret_type func_name( type1 fixed_arg1, typen fixed_argn, ... )
	{ /* stuff using the va_* macros defined by <stdarg.h> */ }