Re: [patch rfc] -Wmissing-prototypes round #3

Kevin Buettner
2003-06-11T23:30:09Z

On Jun 11, 4:59pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> > Some comments with regard to IA-64:
> >
> > 1) I'd rather have the declarations for
> > ia64_linux_sigcontext_register_address() and
> > ia64_aix_sigcontext_register_address() go into a single ia64-tdep.h
> > file. I think having two files is overkill.
>
> I'ts 6 of one half dozen of the other. At least it's clear which .c
> file the .h declaration belongs to. If someone later eliminates it, all
> the better.

I think it's quite likely that an ia64-tdep.h file will prove useful
in the long term, so I don't mind seeing it created. OTOH, I don't
see any point in creating two files which'll likely contain nothing
more than the declarations you're proposing putting in them. These
files and the resulting Makefile.in baggage (dependencies) will just
wind up being deleted at some later time when someone gets around
to doing #2 below.

Also, I don't think it'll be difficult to find the header file
containing the declarations when necessary.

> > 2) However, even that shouldn't be necessary. Now that we have the
> > OSABI machinery, it should be possible to solve the problem without
> > having to export these functions at all.
>
> In the mean time I'd like to get -Wmissing-prototypes enabled.

Sure. I didn't mean for you to do #2. In fact, the problem gets
considerably easier if we delete the IA-64 AIX stuff first. (To
the best of my knowledge, it's completely dead.)

Kevin