c/6968: functions that shouldn't accept arguments accept infinite arguments (eg; test() )

[Terry Moreland]

ok, I'll accept that, but still passing arguments to a function defined in this
way should still produce a warning since the arguments are inaccessible from
within the function and it just looks wrong

Terry

On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, Joseph S. Myers wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, Terry Moreland wrote:
> 
> > mean that in c99 void test() is a function that takes no arguments since 
> > enmpty identifier list is part of the function definition and as such the 
> > void test() example should produce an error in c99, but doesn't in gcc 3.1 using
> > -std=c99 
> > 
> > please let me know if I am wrong, I have slept in a while and the iso c99 spec
> > can be very wordy at times
> 
> It specifies, for the purposes of the definition, that it has no 
> parameters.  It does not, for the purposes of subsequent calls to the 
> function, give it a type that includes a prototype, so the subsequent 
> calls are not checked.
> 
> 

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Terry Moreland       |  Computer and Information Science
tmorelan@uoguelph.ca |              University of Guelph

If you were plowing a field, which would you rather use?  
Two strong oxen or 1024 chickens?
    - Seymour Cray (1925-1996), father of supercomputing
--------------------------------------------------------