Re: [cc65] stack corruption

Hi!

On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 02:15:12PM +0200, Christian Groessler wrote:
> I recently encountered a similar bug
>
> void bla (ovid)
> {
> }
>
> instead of
>
> void bla (void)
> {
> }

That brings up a topic I've been thinking about: I will remove the "implicit
int" rule if the compiler is in C99 mode (because the new C standard does no
longer support it). Is it necessary to allow implicit int in cc65 mode (with
all extensions)? Implicit int will still be allowed in C89 mode, but this
means that old programs cannot use most cc65 specialities.

Pro: Removing "implicit int" would catch errors like the one above.
Con: Very old code may no longer compile without changes.

Regards


        Uz


-- 
Ullrich von Bassewitz                                  uz@musoftware.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.