🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.std.c
Article #3135

Re: <varargs.h> vs. function prototypes

#3135
From: Doug Gwyn
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1991 16:56
21 lines
1481 bytes
In article <25353@oolong.la.locus.com> scotte@locus.com (Scott D. Eberline) writes:
>I'm a bit resigned to having missing prototype warnings for the module
>that contains the function definitions.

As you have discovered, there is no correct way to use prototypes for
<varargs.h>-style variadic functions (when they are supported at all).

You ought to simply use the empty-parenthesis (old style) form of declaration
for such functions.

By the way, I take exception to the implementation warning you that no
prototypes exists, unles you have specifically asked for that check.
The C standard does not require that prototypes be used.

>How dangerous is it to call functions declared externally using the
>ellipsis notation, but defined using va_dcl?  May a conforming implement-
>ation assume that functions with ellipsis prototypes use <stdarg.h>-style
>arguments and not <varargs.h>-style?

The answer to the second question is "Certainly, and indeed it is likely."
Therefore the answer to the first question is that it is not a good idea.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <16405@smoke.brl.mil>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!psuvax1!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
References: <25353@oolong.la.locus.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!psuvax1!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: <varargs.h> vs. function prototypes
Message-ID: <16405@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 13 Jun 91 16:56:49 GMT
References: <25353@oolong.la.locus.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 21