This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Should we make "implicit declaration of function" a mandatory warning?

To: Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au>
Subject: Re: Should we make "implicit declaration of function" a mandatory warning?
From: "Zack Weinberg" <zackw at Stanford dot EDU>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 00:14:37 -0800
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010114234923.D18622@wolery.stanford.edu> <20010115190432.A13274@hg.cs.mu.oz.au>

On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 07:04:33PM +1100, Fergus Henderson wrote:
> On 14-Jan-2001, Zack Weinberg <zackw@stanford.edu> wrote:
> > What do people think
> > of promoting the "implicit declaration of function" warning to
> > mandatory?
> 
> Mandatory sounds a bit harsh, but I'd be quite happy if this
> warning was enabled by default.

That's all I meant by 'mandatory'; what did you think I meant?

zw

References:
- Should we make "implicit declaration of function" a mandatory warning?
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: Should we make "implicit declaration of function" a mandatory warning?
  - From: Fergus Henderson

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]