Hi! On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:23:48PM +0200, Oliver Schmidt wrote: > V2.12.9: > Error: Call to undefined function `...' > > Maybe I missed some discussion/post/... here so I need to ask if this > change in behaviour is intended. Yes it's intended. The comment in the source says: /* C99 doesn't allow calls to undefined functions, so * generate an error and otherwise a warning. ... I've had a look into the standard, but all I could find in the hurry was - remove implicit function declaration in the list of differences to C89 in the foreword. I will recheck this and revert the change if necessary. If you have old sources, you may use "--standard c89" to accept things like mussing function declarations. The disadvantage is that this will also disable C99 and cc65 extensions. 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.Received on Thu Aug 20 20:53:34 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2009-08-20 20:53:36 CEST