Simon Josefsson josefsson.org> writes:
> > In coreutils, I turned on gcc warnings for the gnulib unit tests. This
> > cleans up the modules that are mainly from Jim and myself, and mostly hits
> > places that used 'main ()' or did 'char *foo = "str"'. Simon and Bruno
> > had the most other test
Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > - There is no reason for GCC to warn about foo().
>
> Probably Eric is using -Wstrict-prototypes:
>
> `-Wstrict-prototypes (C and Objective-C only)'
> Warn if a function is declared or defined without specifying the
> argument types. (An old-style fun
Bruno Haible writes:
> According to my understanding of C99,
> - foo() as a function _definition_ defines a function with 0 arguments,
> not with varargs. (Things are different for a function _declaration_
> without a body.)
Yes.
> - There is no reason for GCC to warn about foo().
Hi Eric,
> Simon and Bruno
> had the most other tests that used 'main ()'; C89 says you should use
> 'main (void)' or 'main (int, char**)'
Can you please show me where C89 or C99 says that 'main()' should not be
used?
According to my understanding of C99,
- foo() as a function _definition_ def
Eric Blake writes:
> In coreutils, I turned on gcc warnings for the gnulib unit tests. This
> cleans up the modules that are mainly from Jim and myself, and mostly hits
> places that used 'main ()' or did 'char *foo = "str"'. Simon and Bruno
> had the most other tests that used 'main ()'; C89 s
