Olaf Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's odd: the C standard took a lot of care to ensure that implicit
> declarations would, in fact, continue to work. So this sounds like
> there is a possible conformance issue with the compiler and/or
> standard library lurking here.
Not quite.
The C standard took a lot of care that a programmer could use implicit
declarations for her own functions, but I'm not entirely sure that it
guarantees that library functions will work without the headers. A
bit of research turns up Section 7.1.7 of ISO 9899-1990:
Provided that a library function can be declared without reference
to any type defined in a header, it is also permissible to declare
the function, either explicitly or implicitly, and use it without
including its associated header.
It does seem through a cursory look at the functions that all their
arguments are of types which you'd get through normal promotion (in
the case of implicit declarations)....
Maybe this helps someone, but I'm still unsure.
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die.
