Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: "Catch-23: The New C Standard,Sets the World on Fire" by Terence Kelly with Special Guest Borer Yekai Pan Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 11:54:08 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 38 Message-ID: <87o7nvfu0f.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <87zg7n89zw.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <874jpv84uv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20230407042121.909@kylheku.com> <86r0st3zj0.fsf@linuxsc.com> <871qkshmhv.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <878rezhahb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d6e20649d7415fd7e1f46f27e74936ae"; logging-data="2404561"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19x9siRxjt15gat4zeBUIo1" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:tfCK3Styd2HUpsz5E64cA9qEIVo= sha1:ArPpRfwrsKtonkBj2YkBeqpAwFI= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:169945 jak writes: > Keith Thompson ha scritto: [...] >> I don't know where you got the phrase "specialized function". I'm >> curious what phrase Google Translate generated that from (you haven't >> mentioned what your native language is). [...] > I was looking for the opposite of "implicit default function > declaration" :^( OK, fine. C dropped the "implicit int" rule in the 1999 standard. In C90, this: foo(int arg); would declare foo as a function returning int. In C99 and later it's a syntax error. If I understand you correctly, there is no need for the phrase "specialized function", since all functions are "specialized". One more time: You made a specific claim about some construct requiring a typedef. You seem to be carefully avoiding explaining what you mean. Please either show us a construct that demonstrates the issue you're talking about, or stop wasting our time. (And please also explain what you meant by "stretch" elsewhere in this thread.) You've said it's something you asked about here a few years ago, and you were told that a typedef is required. If you don't remember the details and you aren't able to find them, that's ok; just say so. But you've given the impression, perhaps unintentionally, that you're being deliberately evasive. You asked for an explanation, but you haven't given us the information necessary to provide one. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */