linux-c-programming.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steve Graegert <graegerts@gmail.com>
To: _z33 <timid.Gentoo@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-c-programming@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: default function parameters
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 08:47:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6a00c8d505090823472706ba98@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dfr8v1$kn7$1@sea.gmane.org>

On 9/9/05, _z33 <timid.Gentoo@gmail.com> wrote:
>   I had a wierd doubt today morning. If a function's return type is not
> defined, "C" takes it as returning "int". Now, what does it do when I
> don't specify the arguments of the function. Something like this -
> 
>   void sampleFunc ()
>   {
>        /* ... */
>   }
> 
>   Is this equivalent to saying,
> 
>   void sampleFunc (void)
>   {
>        /* ... */
>   }

Yes, technically both are equivalent.  The latter is the new style
while the former is the "old" style.  But be aware: A function defined
using the old style does __not__ establish a prototype, but if a
previously declared prototype for that function exists, the parameter
declarations in the definition must exactly match those in the
prototype after the default argument promotions are applied to the
parameters in the definition.

Conclusion: avoid mixing old style and prototype style
declarations/definition for a given function. It is allowed but not
recommended.


Regards

	\Steve

--

Steve Graegert <graegerts@gmail.com>
Software Consultancy {C/C++ && Java && .NET}
Mobile: +49 (176)  21248869
Office: +49 (9131) 7126409

  reply	other threads:[~2005-09-09  6:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-09-09 18:43 default function parameters _z33
2005-09-09  6:47 ` Steve Graegert [this message]
2005-09-09 19:38   ` _z33
2005-09-09  7:36     ` Steve Graegert
2005-09-09  8:46       ` _z33
2005-09-09  9:23         ` Jarmo
2005-09-09  9:42           ` Steve Graegert
2005-09-09  9:58             ` _z33
2005-09-09  9:50           ` _z33
2005-09-09  9:34         ` Steve Graegert
2005-09-09  9:44           ` _z33
2005-09-09 10:20             ` Steve Graegert
2005-09-09 13:00         ` Glynn Clements
2005-09-09 12:50     ` Glynn Clements
2005-09-09 12:43 ` Glynn Clements
2005-09-10  5:00   ` _z33

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=6a00c8d505090823472706ba98@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=graegerts@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-c-programming@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=timid.Gentoo@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).