Re: RFC: status icon support

[Andreas Schwab]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> There is nothing undefined in old-style function defintions.
>
> There certainly is.  If they don't match the prototype, the compiler is
> free to do whatever it thinks correct. 

Wrong.  In the presence of a prototype there is no difference between an
old-style and a new-style definition.

> It is not required to generate an error.

A compiler is never required to generate an error.  The standard calls
this a diagnostic, and the compiler can do whatever it pleases after it
has issued a diagnostic.

> Where is the point in combining a prototype that won't compile under K&R
> compilers with a K&R definition (which won't compile under C++ or newer
> standard compilers)?

A standard compiler is required to accept them.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."