On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:31:19 +0100, Jacob Carlborg <d...@me.com> wrote:
On 2012-07-17 17:11, Regan Heath wrote:
Ahh, I've been looking at the ANSI C spec and assuming that is what
you're basing things off, K&R C was pre-ANSI C and may have different
rules. I think you should probably aim to be ANSI C compliant and
above, and ignore K&R.
This page says otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_C#Compliance_detectability
"...while an obsolescent non-prototype declaration is used otherwise.
Those are still ANSI-compliant as of C99 and C90, but their use is
discouraged".
The full quote:
"In the above example, a prototype is used in a function declaration for
ANSI compliant implementations, while an obsolescent non-prototype
declaration is used otherwise. Those are still ANSI-compliant as of C99
and C90, but their use is discouraged."
1) "a prototype is used in a function declaration for ANSI compliant
implementations"
implies an ANSI compliant compiler /requires/ the full prototype.
2) "obsolescent non-prototype declaration is used otherwise"
implies non-prototype forms are /obsolete/
3) "Those are still"
what is being referred to by the word "those" in that sentence, it's not
immediately clear to me. It could mean the non-prototype (as you've
assumed) but it might also mean the entire construct (using "#if
__STDC__").
R
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
