cpplib: convert to C89 function definitions

[Eric Christopher]

> This patch raises a style question: In several places we now have
> 
> static int foo (int, int);
> static int
> foo (int a, int b)
> { ... }
> 
> Do we want to keep the separate prototype?  I can make a case either
> way; having the prototypes makes life easier if another function ever
> gets inserted above foo, but it is kind of odd-looking and you have to
> change two places if you change the function signature.  For now I'm
> not changing it.

I personally appreciate the separate prototypes.

-eric

-- 
Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>