Sender: vheyndri AT rug DOT ac DOT be Message-ID: <3580FC0A.4D10@rug.ac.be> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 11:59:38 +0200 From: Vik Heyndrickx MIME-Version: 1.0 To: DJ Delorie CC: nate AT cartsys DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: inb/outb References: <199806112347 DOT TAA11699 AT delorie DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk DJ Delorie wrote: > > > The `inb' and `outb' functions are missing their prototypes in . > > Here is a patch. > > Beware - some prototypes are left out of headers because various > systems have conflicting definitions of them. xmalloc, for example, > is defined different ways in different GNU packages, and none expect > the system headers to have them. If I'm correct, the compiler assumes the default when a prototype is omitted. Since the default is ``int'', isn't omitting a prototype equally as bad as providing some prototype? -- \ Vik /-_-_-_-_-_-_/ \___/ Heyndrickx / \ /-_-_-_-_-_-_/ Knight in the Order of the Unsigned Types