[Bug fortran/33097] Function decl trees without proper argument list

[asl at math dot spbu dot ru]

------- Comment #13 from asl at math dot spbu dot ru  2007-10-17 17:27 -------
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > void foo2(some_fat_struct *ptr); but:
> > int foo(...);
> > 
> > This looks pretty unlogical to me. Was it intentional?
> 
> Yes, I think that's intentional. Why is it unlogical?
Because return type dictates, whether there is ellipsis or not. I think, that
both functions should be varargs, no?

> Also, have you looked at how character variables are handled? (appending string
> length in the arg list) That's a surprising calling convention for people
> coming from C...
Yes, I saw this. It's pretty clear, not surprising :) 


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33097