Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!uunet!epiwrl.entropic.com!usenet From: kenh@entropic.com (Ken Hornstein) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps Subject: Re: Anyone succesfully compiled chimera+term for NetBSD-1.0_BETA?? Date: 5 Nov 1994 00:19:30 -0500 Organization: Entropic Research Lab, Washington, DC. Lines: 13 Message-ID: <39f4l2$m5n@epiwrl.entropic.com> References: <397obg$cra@nntp1.u.washington.edu> <CyqH97.J43@beaver.cs.washington.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: epiwrl.entropic.com In article <CyqH97.J43@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, Gary Herron <herron@june.cs.washington.edu> wrote: >BTW, If this code were written with ansi prototypes, this >problem would be caught at compile time. Is there a reason >for sticking with the old style? I see none. Gnu's >protoize can easily fix about 99% of the code, so the conversion >is really very little work. Actually, gcc will catch a type mismatch like this even if you use the old style of function prototypes. The reason it wasn't picked up was probably because the right header files (like unistd.h). --Ken