From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 30 17:46:38 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E6037B401 for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 17:46:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE3843FCB for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 17:46:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) Received: by flood.ping.uio.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 91923530E; Sat, 31 May 2003 02:46:34 +0200 (CEST) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Wes Peters References: <20030528231134.GE23471@spc.org> <200305301727.06623.wes@softweyr.com> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 02:46:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200305301727.06623.wes@softweyr.com> (Wes Peters's message of "Fri, 30 May 2003 17:27:06 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1001 (Gnus v5.10.1) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer Subject: Re: gcc bug? Openoffice port impossibel to compile on 4.8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 00:46:39 -0000 Wes Peters writes: > On Thursday 29 May 2003 00:12, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > May I remind you that K&R-style declarations have been deprecated for > > the last 14 years? > Funny, the last time I looked at a C language specification they were > still supported. 6.11.5 Function definitions [#1] The use of function definitions with separate parameter identifier and declaration lists (not prototype-format parameter type and identifier declarators) is an obsolescent feature. and "obsolescent feature" is defined as follows in the introduction: [#2] Certain features are obsolescent, which means that they may be considered for withdrawal in future revisions of this International Standard. They are retained because of their widespread use, but their use in new implementations (for implementation features) or new programs (for language [6.11] or library features [7.26]) is discouraged. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org