----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew DeFaria"
It's not me that wants it - was my former client. They had a requirement
to use (void) parms (I don't know why - it was my understanding that ()
parms issue only a warning but they claimed their compiler treated it as
an error - maybe it was just a dictate to get rid of warnings).
I guess it depends upon the flags the compiler uses.
With the compilers/flags that I use, I haven't even seen any warnings.
For me the build succeeds, but the created xs file is botched in such a way
that the Inline functions are not found at runtime.
(void) is valid syntax and I see no reason why it should not be supported.
Agreed.
This was first raised in a bug report (that's still open) 8 years ago:
https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=5465
Just looking at it again, I find (to my surprise) that I found a fix for
this a few years ago. (I remember looking at it previously ... but had
forgotten about any progress that I made.)
As I mention there, my "fix" doesn't inspire me with any great confidence,
so I didn't take it any further.
It just replaces the "(void)" in the code with "()" ... and probably would
not have satisfied your client even if it has no nasty side-effects.
Interesting that it "worked" .... probably not the right approach, but.
Might be better to fix the parsing of $o->{ILSM}{code}, methinks ;-)
I might see if I can discover something with ParseRegExp.pm. (I don't
understand P::RD at all.)
Cheers,
Rob
