Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes: > 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.
But that isn't a prototype. > 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). How does a definition help here if it isn't a prototype? 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."
