From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28074 invoked by alias); 26 Sep 2005 19:54:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 28001 invoked by uid 48); 26 Sep 2005 19:54:23 -0000 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 19:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050926195423.28000.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050926192427.24068.dann@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> References: <20050926192427.24068.dann@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/24068] Unconditional warning when using -combine X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg03111.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2005-09-26 19:54 ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Because one file uses K&R style function defintions and the other uses a prototype which is ANSI/ISO > style. > Simple example: [snip] > So I don't think this is not an inappropriate warning. The question is: can this EVER result in incorrect behavior? Is it incorrect from the standard point of view? If the answer to the above is no, then there no reason to warn. > -------------------------------------------- > As an aside, I wish people would stop using K&R style C already. Aggreed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24068