This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: non-static definition after static declaration
- To: "Philippe De Muyter" <phdm at macqel dot be>
- Subject: Re: non-static definition after static declaration
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 00:46:50 -0700
- cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org (gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org)
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <199911261022.LAA22961@mail.macqel.be>you write:
> Fix :
> As we want to be able to bootstrap gcc with old compilers, I think we
> should add `-Wtraditional' in WARN_CFLAGS.
I agree, even over Kaveh's objections. Fixing these kinds of problems is
always incredibly annoying. Now if I could convince the binutils project
to do the same thing :-)
> Fri Nov 26 10:42:54 1999 Philippe De Muyter <phdm@macqel.be>
>
> * integrate.c (mark_stores): Function definition made void, to match
> previous declaration.
> * regclass.c (dump_regclass): Ditto.
> * Makefile.in (WARN_CFLAGS): Macro augmented by `-Wtraditional'.
Thanks. Installed.
jeff