Follow-up Comment #5, sr #110530 (project autoconf): Don't shoot the messenger. Ok, it's true, I don't know whether there was an alternative that Apple did not pursue in which implicit function declarations could have been allowed. All I know is that they determined that this was the best way forward. If you disagree with them, you may file a bug report with them and work with them toward a solution for a future release of clang. But until then, we're left with the current reality, which is that, according to Apple, if you allow implicit function declarations, you risk creating a program (whether it is the main program you're compiling or a configuration test that is trying to determine some system capability) that on Apple Silicon processors either crashes or behaves incorrectly. Apple didn't choose for this behavior to happen; it's just how arm64 processors work. In order to avoid that eventuality and to let you know about the problem in advance, at compile time, implicit declaration of functions is an error. Do not use -Wno-error=implicit-function-declaration to attempt to circumvent this protection.
_______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/support/?110530> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/