This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Clean-up C's builtin function type matching.
- From: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>
- To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- Cc: "David O'Brien" <obrien at freebsd dot org>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 11:58:17 -0600 (MDT)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clean-up C's builtin function type matching.
On 21 Jul 2003, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Roger Sayle <roger@eyesopen.com> writes:
>
> | I do believe there's a strong argument for -pedantic for the non-public
> | redeclaration, but perhaps the FreeBSD community might also consider
> | fixing their non-conformant usage of reserved symbols?
>
> Why would
>
> int main(void) { int sin = 0; return sin; }
>
> be a non-conformant usage of 'sin'?
Please keep up, Gaby :> I said that warnings for non-public declarations
such as those above should be guarded by -pedentic, but David was
complaining that it was "extern int exp;" that was considered a
real regression by the FreeBSD folks. He complained about "exp",
not "sin"!
redeclaring public symbols = non-conformant.
redeclaring non-public symbols = pedantic warning.
But perhaps I could have been clearer in my last message.
Roger
--