[BTW, your Mail-Followup-To: is broken. I guess you need to tell your mailer what your real address is rather than just "floris".]
On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 08:06:33PM +0000, Bruynooghe Floris wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 06:12:28PM +0000, Pigeon wrote: > > #include <stdlib.h> // need this to use malloc() > > Well I thought so to, but it _did_ work without to my surprise > (discovered after I stupidly forgot it) For largely historical reasons, C lets you get away with unprototyped functions, to some extent: they default to int(). However, if you're working on a system such as IA-64, you'll find that int is 32 bits while void * (malloc()'s return type) is 64 bits. The result of this is that pointers returned from malloc() will be truncated, usually leading to a segfault almost immediately afterwards. Thus, unprototyped use of malloc() is not portable. Using the -Wall flag (you should) will warn you about such things. > But using `//' is also a C++ism no? Certainly traditionally yes, although I don't remember right now whether C99 allows them (even so, don't use // in portable code). gcc allows it unless you use the -ansi or -traditional flags, the latter of which you probably don't want to use the latter unless you're compiling really old code. > BTW; thanks to all of you for the replies, I couldn't find this in any > book (not even K&R). You should find plenty of stuff about prototyping, and certainly about declaration order, in the second or later editions of K&R. It may be slightly cryptic though. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
