On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Warren Turkal wrote: > Thomas Dickey wrote: > > > while I'm perfectly aware that "extern" is redundant, there are two things > > to be said in favor of keeping it: > > > > a) it's easy to grep for > > sure > > > b) some compilers silently ignore conflicts with a "static" definition of > > the prototype, but can be persuaded to warn if the extern is explicit. > > (gcc does this, making it unsuitable as the only compiler to use for > > testing). > > > > also - "extern" prototypes really should be moved to a header file, > > otherwise they're not effective at flagging mismatches between different > > files.. > > > > All of the extern functions were defined in the file. These appear to be > functions only useful to xwininfo. Why make a header for a one *.c program?
I was offering general advice - most of the files in the X tree have a' mixture of extern/static prototypes. If a function's not used outside a given file, there's no reason to mark it "extern"... -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
