🚀 go-pugleaf

Consider this example:

int f(int (*)[]);
int f(a)
int (*a)[3];
{
  return sizeof(*a);
}

I believe the two function types are compatible.  I also believe that a
composite type should be formed.  3.1.2.6 says

"If only one type is a function type with a parameter type list (a function
prototype), the composite type is a function prototype with the parameter
type list."

I believe the second type (in the function definition) does not have
a "parameter type list," so the above seems to suggest that the composite
should just be the type

int f(int (*)[])

taking the parameter type list from the prototyped type.  Is that right?
If that's the case, does that mean that the sizeof is illegal?


Steve Adamczyk (jsa@edg.com or uunet!edg1!jsa; 201-744-2620)