Re: OT: gcc warning: implicit declaration of function

[Bryce Schober <bryceman at dpzone dot com>]

Dan Kegel wrote:

> This sounds kind of like http://gcc.gnu.org/PR8307
> Does Pete's workaround there help?

OK, I had /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/arm-elf/3.3/include/stdlib.h, which 
looked stingy.  I also had /usr/local/arm-elf/include/stdlib.h, which 
looked generous, and matched newlib's stdlib (I couldn't find anything 
matching the in-use stdlib, which is worrisome).  So I deleted the 
in-use stdlib, so gcc would find the newlib-matching-stdlib (farther 
down the search path, I checked), and it compiles without any warnings. 
 However, now I'm left with the worry that my toolchain is inconsistent 
or borked in some other way.  And I still have the same warning, but 
between my own files.  For example:

[dir]
main.c
foo.h
foo.c
[/dir]

[main.c]
#include foo.h
int main() {
  foo_func();
  return 0;
}
[/main.c]

[foo.h]
void foo_func();
[/foo.h]

[foo.c]
void foo_func() {;}
[/foo.c]

This will generate the same warning in main.c for foo_func.  Am I being 
ignorant about how this modularity should be done?  I always was more of 
an assembly programmer...

--
Bryce Schober
Design Engineer
Dynon Avionics, Inc.
www.dynonavionics.com

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by digiposs.com]


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com