This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc-in-cxx update
2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>
>> 2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
>> > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> BTW, why is this warned about?
>> >> >
>> >> > I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use "extern" when
>> >> > defining something, only on a declaration that is not a definition.
>> >>
>> >> But may it lead to some confusion or subtle error? It seems overly
>> >> pedantic to me if it is just a matter of style, because ?extern is
>> >> implicit if missing,
>> >
>> > "int i;" is not the same as "extern int i;".
>>
>> Sorry for my ignorance but I have been reading and searching for the
>> answer and I cannot tell what is the difference between "int i = 1"
>> and "extern int i = 1" at file-scope in C.
>
> I did not say those were different, I said the uninitialized case was
> different, so "extern is implicit if missing" is not a general C rule.
OK, then. I assumed that we were discussing about the initialized
case, which is the origin of this thread. Hence, my suggestion stands:
get rid of the warning.
Cheers,
Manuel.