On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopeziba...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com>: >> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >> >>> 2009/4/29 Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com>: >>> > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >>> > >>> >> >> BTW, why is this warned about? >>> >> > >>> >> > I imagine because in C it is not conventional to use "extern" when >>> >> > defining something, only on a declaration that is not a definition. >>> >> >>> >> But may it lead to some confusion or subtle error? It seems overly >>> >> pedantic to me if it is just a matter of style, because extern is >>> >> implicit if missing, >>> > >>> > "int i;" is not the same as "extern int i;". >>> >>> Sorry for my ignorance but I have been reading and searching for the >>> answer and I cannot tell what is the difference between "int i = 1" >>> and "extern int i = 1" at file-scope in C. >> >> I did not say those were different, I said the uninitialized case was >> different, so "extern is implicit if missing" is not a general C rule. > > OK, then. I assumed that we were discussing about the initialized > case, which is the origin of this thread. Hence, my suggestion stands: > get rid of the warning.
I do not follow your reasoning here. BTW, I already the history of the warning. -- Gaby
