Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 16:04:43 -0800 (PST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org>, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Subject: Re: Are prototypes for main() illegal by any standard ? (was Re: Message-ID: <XFMail.011216160443.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20011216075240.A29455@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 16-Dec-01 David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 05:53:49PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: >> If adding the prototype for main() does *break* something, then it >> would be helpful to find out what it is that breaks. > > main() is special. The C compiler knows it returns an int and for us, > can take up to three arguments. Because the prototype for main() is set > in stone, that is why the user should not supply one. Lest they will > prototype it as "void main (float, char *[])". > > We would not add a prototype for printf() in a program, we would include > stdio.h instead. This is the same with main() except rather than it > being prototyped in a header, it is prototyped w/in the compiler. > > This is comming up due to a bug in a single compiler. We have fixed that > compiler. AFAIK the other two compilers we use at all today -- TenDRA > and Compaq's compiler does not have this bug. So why change all this > code when we fixed things at the source of the problem? Agreed. Requesting prototypes for main is the compiler bug, not hiding the warning for main. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.011216160443.jhb>