gcc 4.1 regression for adjusted function declaration?

[Joern RENNECKE]

Andrew Pinski wrote:

>  
> GCC before 4.0.0 was incorrect at not rejecting this code.
> See PR 19333.
> Use -pedantic with 3.2.3 and you will get a warning.

Yes, I do, but it is also questionable if this warning is required or 
even useful.

>
> Also see:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg00948.html

The issue there is completely different.  The array has definetly no 
completed type.

In the testcase I have given - which is pruned down from the pthread.h 
header file on
a linux installation - after applying adjustment, you get:

extern void f (struct tag *a);

which is fine.  So this is only about the technicality if the adjustment 
is actually
defined in this case.  It appears to me that the intent of the standard 
was that this
should be defined, while the letter of it is not even self-consistet.