Date:	Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:44:12 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To:	Peter Palotas <blizzar AT hem1 DOT passagen DOT se>
cc:	firewind <firewind AT metroid DOT dyn DOT ml DOT org>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Reading the command line
In-Reply-To:	<3.0.16.19971029215033.35b7c09c@hem1.passagen.se>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.971030114345.348E-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Peter Palotas wrote:

> If this is so, why doesn't the compiler generate an error for declaring
> main() as 'void main()'?

The GCC on-line manual explains this:

    Some users try to use `-pedantic' to check programs for strict ANSI
    C conformance.  They soon find that it does not do quite what they
    want: it finds some non-ANSI practices, but not all--only those
    for which ANSI C *requires* a diagnostic.

    A feature to report any failure to conform to ANSI C might be
    useful in some instances, but would require considerable
    additional work and would be quite different from `-pedantic'.

- Raw text -