This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GNU C: Implicit int and implicit function definitions
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>
- Cc: GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 09:40:33 -0600
- Subject: Re: GNU C: Implicit int and implicit function definitions
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <2dd49b4d-0722-bbcd-0e0d-dd6eb690e43d at redhat dot com> <87oa8184o3 dot fsf at linux-m68k dot org> <f6e9631d-80a7-a533-4ffa-b96efebdf8d0 at redhat dot com>
On 05/20/2016 03:24 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
I think it's worth revisiting as well, burying in -pedantic seems wrong
given the kinds of failures we can see.
On 05/20/2016 11:22 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Florian Weimer <email@example.com> writes:
C99 got rid of implicit function definitions and implicit ints.
be possible to remove them retroactively from the -std=gnu99 and
-std=gnu11 language variants (as well as -std=c99 and -std=c11), so that
they are rejected by default?
I want the default changed. (I thought this was sufficiently clear from