Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <v5rv37$j79k$1@dont-email.me>
Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<v5rv37$j79k$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Baby X is bor nagain
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 17:54:14 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <v5rv37$j79k$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v494f9$von8$1@dont-email.me> <v53lf7$34huc$1@dont-email.me>
 <v53vh6$368vf$1@dont-email.me> <v54se1$3bqsk$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240624160941.0000646a@yahoo.com> <v5bu5r$va3a$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240624181006.00003b94@yahoo.com> <v5c86d$11ac7$1@dont-email.me>
 <JEheO.108086$ED9b.74955@fx11.iad> <v5cblg$11q0j$1@dont-email.me>
 <gEieO.108089$ED9b.25598@fx11.iad> <20240625113616.000075e0@yahoo.com>
 <mUzeO.141609$Cqra.55051@fx10.iad> <v5elql$1jmii$1@dont-email.me>
 <m3BeO.24907$Gurd.16179@fx34.iad> <v5empd$1jndv$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5eph4$1k6a9$1@dont-email.me> <87ed8jnbmf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <v5jhls$2m7np$1@dont-email.me> <v5jm32$2nqvp$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5k3v2$2qllm$1@dont-email.me> <v5kfst$2svt3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5kmlm$2u918$1@dont-email.me> <20240627201830.854@kylheku.com>
 <v5m2nl$39qob$3@dont-email.me> <20240628032211.403@kylheku.com>
 <v5p4rv$3u92q$1@dont-email.me> <v5phah$168u$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5posa$2kq0$1@dont-email.me> <20240630121835.00000e48@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 17:54:15 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2ca679e29179d29d7b551100dcb36956";
	logging-data="630068"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18l9saPRGMMd4x0CnE1CqudTANT5UGdwJE="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TD4iqmo99Fu3YdbEcN9M74rS7oU=
In-Reply-To: <20240630121835.00000e48@yahoo.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 4243

On 30/06/2024 11:18, Michael S wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 20:55:54 +0100
> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 29/06/2024 18:46, Richard Harnden wrote:
>>> On 29/06/2024 15:14, bart wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> My older bcc compiler reported 4 as a hard error unless an
>>>> override was used.
>>>
>>> But you didn't say anything about main's args.
>>
>> I did, indirectly. The actual error was the use of "()" as an empty
>> parameter list (for any function, not just main, but my example could
>> also have been 'void H(){H(123);}'). If you tried to compile:
>>
>>      int main() {
>>          main(123);
>>      }
>>
>> then it wouldn't get past the () to the call.
>>
>> Eventually I dropped that restriction, and the reason was that so
>> much code used such parameter lists, for any function.
>>
>> Not because they wanted unchecked args (there are some legitimate
>> use-cases within function pointer types), but because so many people
>> assumed () meant zero parameters like (void).
>>
>> Why was such code so common? Presumably because compilers said
>> nothing; and they couldn't because the language allowed it. If they
>> had required an override like mine did, more would have got the
>> message.
>>
> 
> I tried following code:
> int foo() { return 1; }
> 
> Both MSVC and clang warn about it at high warnings level (-Wall for
> MSVC, -Wpedantic for clang). But they dont warn at levels that most
> people use in practice (-W3 or -W4 for MSVC, -Wall for clang).
> gcc13 produces no warning even at -Wpedantic. It does produce warning
> with '-Wpedantic -std=xxx' for all values of xxx except c23 and gnu23.
> The absence of warning for c23/gnu23 makes sense, the rest of gcc
> behavior - less so.
> 

gcc -Wpedantic makes very little sense without specifying a C standard 
(rather than a gnu C standard).

But why would you expect a warning from code that is perfectly legal and 
well-defined C code, without explicitly enabling warnings that check for 
particular style issues?  Non-prototype function declarations are 
deprecated (since C99), but not removed from the language until C23 
(where that declaration is now a function prototype).