[tz] suggestions for potential code improvements?
Paul Eggert
eggert at cs.ucla.edu
Fri Jul 24 16:34:50 UTC 2015
Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
> If I read Kees’s comments correctly, he's talking about mismatches between declaration and definition. That’s a different issue; the two should match.
Kees is not talking about this:
int a (char *);
int a (char const *v) {return *v;}
He's talking about this:
int b (char *);
int b (char *const v) {return *v;}
Although the first combination is invalid, the second one conforms to the C
standard and this has been true since C89. Any compiler that warns about the
second combination is merely complaining about style; it's not a correctness issue.
More information about the tz
mailing list