[Bug regex/1220] New: regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[Bug regex/1220] New: regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

regex uses old (K&R) style function definitions, which causes
problems when it is compiled using g++ outside of glibc.  For example:

   g++ -W -Wswitch -Wcomment -Wpointer-arith -Wimplicit -Wreturn-type
-Wno-sign-compare -Wno-invalid-offsetof -g -DUNICODE -I. -I. -I..
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -c regex.c
   In file included from regex.c:85:
   regex_internal.c:46: error: `reg_errcode_t re_string_allocate' redeclared as
different kind of symbol
   regex_internal.h:383: error: previous declaration of `reg_errcode_t
re_string_allocate(re_string_t*, const char*, int, int, char*, int, const
re_dfa_t*)'

For more details about the g++ problem, please see Sam Steingold's bug report
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2005-08/msg00096.html>.

These days there's no longer any reason for regex to use K&R function
definition syntax, so I'm installing the attached patch into gnulib.  Can you
please propagate this into glibc?  Thanks.

-- 
           Summary: regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail
           Product: glibc
           Version: 2.3.5
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: regex
        AssignedTo: gotom at debian dot or dot jp
        ReportedBy: eggert at gnu dot org
                CC: glibc-bugs-regex at sources dot redhat dot com,glibc-
                    bugs at sources dot redhat dot com


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From eggert at gnu dot org  2005-08-20 07:26 -------
Created an attachment (id=597)
 --> (http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=597&action=view)
use function prototypes for definitions


-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  BugsThisDependsOn|                            |1217


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |1221
              nThis|                            |


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |1224
              nThis|                            |


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |1231
              nThis|                            |


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[eggert at gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |1281
              nThis|                            |


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[drepper at redhat dot com]

-- 
Bug 1220 depends on bug 1217, which changed state.

Bug 1217 Summary: regcomp.c elicits uninitialized-variable warnings with GCC 4
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1217

           What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[drepper at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2005-09-06 18:10 -------
> These days there's no longer any reason for regex to use K&R function
> definition syntax,

Wrong.  Using K&R function definitions ensures that the compiler warns about
missing prototypes.  This is finer grained than a compiler can achieve this.

It is simply wrong to use g++ to compile regex.c.  Period.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[bruno at clisp dot org]

------- Additional Comments From bruno at clisp dot org  2006-04-19 17:43 -------
Ulrich Drepper wrote: 
> Using K&R function definitions ensures that the compiler warns about 
> missing prototypes.  This is finer grained than a compiler can achieve this. 
 
Wrong. gcc has two options that warn for missing prototypes, even when ANSI/ISO 
C 
function definitions are used: -Wmissing-prototypes and -Wmissing-declarations. 
 
Look: 
============================== foo.c ========================= 
int foo(int, int); 
int foo (int x, int y) { return x + y; } 
 
int no_prototype (int x, int y) { return x + y; } 
============================================================ 
$ gcc -Wmissing-declarations -c foo.c 
foo.c:4: warning: no previous declaration for `no_prototype' 
$ gcc -Wmissing-prototypes -c foo.c 
foo.c:4: warning: no previous prototype for `no_prototype' 
 
> It is simply wrong to use g++ to compile regex.c.  Period. 
 
Your attitude hampers the reuse of the code in GNU clisp. Saying "Period" 
is not a sound technical argument. I'm therefore reopening this issue. 
 

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[bruno at clisp dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bruno at clisp dot org


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug regex/1220] regex uses old-style definitions that cause g++ to fail

[drepper at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2006-04-25 18:01 -------
Stop reopening the bug.  This is all valid C code.  Everybody who misuses the
code is on her/his own.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.