On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Andreas Schwab <sch...@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes: > >> when a "real prototype" was visible > > How is that different from a prototype?
It's different from the case where a K&R definition was seen and thus type information is present via that mechanism. We don't want to warn in that case. As I suggested, the warning should just print "without a prototype" but "prototype" here means that a definition before the call is enough to make us happy (as opposed to -Wstrict-prototypes which warns about function definitions without a previous prototype we want to warn about calls to functions without a definition or a prototype). Any better suggestion? Richard. > Andreas. > > -- > Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org > GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 > "And now for something completely different."
