Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:17:06 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Andris Pavenis cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, DJ Delorie Subject: Re: xmalloc and xfree In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Andris Pavenis wrote: > On 10 Oct 1999, Felix Natter wrote: > > > "Kalum Somaratna" writes: > > > Hi Felix, > > > The header file wich contain's the definition is stdlib.h as > > > documented in the doc's. > > > > > > #include > > > void *xmalloc(size_t size); > > > > > > It is strange that you got the messages. I compiled your program > > > and it linked without any problems and I also didn't get any > > > undefined reference's. > > > > did you also not get any warnings like "implicit declaration of ..." ? > > because that's what I got with gcc-2.8.1, and now with gcc-2.95.1 > > it's getting an error message > > Yes, now -ansi-pedantic is the default for C++ compiler. Current C++ > standard does not permit implicit declarations. Of course You can use > command line option -fpermissive to get warnings instead of errors for > some standard violations. But I suggest to fix Your source better. Perhaps we should uncomment the prototype of xmalloc and friends in stdlib.h, but only #ifdef __cplusplus. Comments? Btw, isn't that -ansi-pedantic default of C++ a good reason to complain about to the GCC maintainers? As far as I understand, that means, in particular, that C++ programs will not see prototypes of non-ANSI functions in our C headers, right? I guess there are other calamities as well. Or maybe we should turn that switch off in specs?