All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc: Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@nokia.com>,
	apw@canonical.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] checkpatch.pl: thou shalt not use () or (...) in function declarations
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 09:53:22 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6B5902.1080607@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F6B51C9.6010904@suse.cz>

On 03/22/2012 09:22 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> 
> That explanation is not fully correct. C99 explicitly says (6.7.5.3.14):
> An identifier list declares only the identifiers of the parameters of
> the function. An empty list in a function declarator that is part of a
> definition of that function specifies that the function has no
> parameters. The empty list in a function declarator that is not part of
> a definition of that function specifies that no information about the
> number or types of the parameters is supplied.
> 
> So what you are trying to force here holds only for (forward)
> declarations. Not for functions with definitions (bodies). Is checkpatch
> capable to differ between those?
> 

We shouldn't use it anyway.  gcc might take it that way in C99 mode, but
it's unclear if it does it in the default mode, and having declarators
and definitions be different is just asking for trouble.

	-hpa


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-03-22 16:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-22 15:27 [PATCH 1/1] checkpatch.pl: thou shalt not use () or (...) in function declarations Phil Carmody
2012-03-22 15:49 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2012-03-22 16:33   ` Joe Perches
2012-03-22 16:22 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-03-22 16:49   ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2012-03-22 16:55     ` Jiri Slaby
2012-03-22 17:00       ` Jiri Slaby
2012-03-22 17:17       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2012-03-22 19:00         ` Joe Perches
2012-03-22 16:53   ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2012-03-22 16:56     ` Jiri Slaby
2012-03-22 17:48     ` Phil Carmody
2012-03-22 19:10       ` Peter Seebach
2012-03-22 20:01         ` Phil Carmody
2012-03-22 17:17   ` Nick Bowler
2012-03-22 17:19     ` Nick Bowler
2012-03-26 10:03     ` Pedro Alves
2012-04-16  6:11       ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-03-22 17:32   ` Phil Carmody
2012-04-15 18:18   ` Phil Carmody

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=4F6B5902.1080607@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=apw@canonical.com \
    --cc=ext-phil.2.carmody@nokia.com \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.