Article View: gnu.gcc.bug
Article #2097undefined statics become externs?
From: Bill Sommerfeld
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1988 01:47
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1988 01:47
23 lines
1190 bytes
1190 bytes
It seems reasonable (to me at least) for a C compiler to complain about the following source file: ---- static int foo(); static int (*bar)() = foo; ---- since foo is never defined anywhere in the file. GCC (1.32/VAX) doesn't complain. But then again, neither does PCC, or High C, or Domain/OS C; all these compilers merely treat "foo" as if it were declared "extern" rather than "static". For you language lawyers out there: does the dpANS say anything about this? Ken Raeburn looked at it (very briefly) but couldn't find anything explicit about undefined static functions (it was mentioned that declared but undefined static "objects" were initialized to zero, but the definition of "object" used in the dpANS appears to exclude function bodies). - Bill
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8812300147.AA11412@ANUBIS.MIT.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!telly!ddsw1!lll-winken!killer!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ATHENA.MIT.EDU!wesommerShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!telly!ddsw1!lll-winken!killer!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ATHENA.MIT.EDU!wesommer From: wesommer@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Sommerfeld) Newsgroups: gnu.gcc.bug Subject: undefined statics become externs? Message-ID: <8812300147.AA11412@ANUBIS.MIT.EDU> Date: 30 Dec 88 01:47:35 GMT Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Distribution: gnu Organization: GNUs Not Usenet Lines: 23