On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Piotr Dziwinski via cfe-commits <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > piotrdz added a comment. > > @Eugene: I don't understand, what does declaring function with "void" > argument have in common with this review? I only check here variable > declarations inside functions. > > Maybe you meant my other review for inconsistent declaration parameter names? > If so, this is how it behaves currently: > > $ cat test.c > void allright(); > void allright(void); > > void notallright(int a); > void notallright(int b); > > $ clang-tidy > -checks='-*,readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name' test.c -- > -std=c11 > 1 warning generated. > /work/clang-trunk/test.c:4:6: warning: function 'notallright' has other > declaration with different parameter name(s) > [readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name] > void notallright(int a); > ^ > /work/clang-trunk/test.c:5:6: note: other declaration seen here > void notallright(int b); > > So I see no reason to add specific checks for functions with "void" > parameter, unless you see something wrong with this behavior?
In C, void allright(); is a function accepting a variable number of arguments, and void alright(void); is a function accepting no arguments. In C++, they are both functions accepting no arguments. ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
