Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!shelby!unix!hplabs!hp-ses!hpcuhb!hpcllla!hpclisp!hpclwjm!walter
From: walter@hpclwjm.HP.COM (Walter Murray)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Prototypes with old style definitions
Message-ID: <660075@hpclwjm.HP.COM>
Date: 14 Feb 90 22:10:12 GMT
References: <626@cameron.cs.duke.edu>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Calif. Language Lab
Lines: 22

Mark H. Colburn writes:

Concerning the example:

><<	float foo(float, int);
><<
><<	float foo(x, n)
><<	float x;
><<	int n;
><<	{ ......... }

> I was under the impression that the standard allowed parameters to be
> passed between functions without type coersion in this manner as long
> as there was a function prototype in effect.  

That is true, but if you have a parameter of type float and you want
to prevent promotion to double, both the declaration (if given) and
the definition must use prototypes.  This is a case where you can't
mix a prototype declaration and an old-style definition.

Walter
----------