From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25948 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2006 12:31:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 25938 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jul 2006 12:31:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:31:06 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1G2oj8-0003pe-2j; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 08:31:02 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:31:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [commit] Cleanup display.c (and a bit of tracepoint.c too) Message-ID: <20060718123101.GA14653@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200607172216.k6HMGUfa023698@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-07/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 06:21:59AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:16:30 +0200 (CEST) > > From: Mark Kettenis > > > > After inviting people to remove redundant prototypes for static > > functions, I thought I'd set an example. > > Aren't there compilers out there which insist on forward declarations > for static functions? I surely hope not; to the best of my understanding that would be a violation of the C standard. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery