new style declarations OK for old style definitions?

[Tim McDaniel]

The original question was about mixing an old-style, unprototyped
function definition in one file with a new-style, prototyped
declaration in another.

In article <1991Apr03.141849.26379 at convex.com> grogers at convex.com
(Geoffrey Rogers) writes:

   In article <14590 at life.ai.mit.edu> tmb at ai.mit.edu writes:
   > Is it sufficient to use only promoted arguments in the new-style
   > declaration?

   Yes. If you don't use the default promotion types you will have
   problems.

Exactly.

   >Is it legal for the compiler to choose
   >completely incompatible calling sequences for old-style and new-style
   >declarations?

   Yes.

No.  Section 3.5.4.3 of the Standard defines compatability of function
types.  An old-style function declaration is compatable with a
new-style declaration, if the new-style uses promoted arguments and
doesn't use ellipses.

Thus, with care, you CAN mix new-style with old-style.  Because of the
care required, I do not recommend such mixing.

--
   "Of course he has a knife.  We all have knives.  It's 1183, and we're
   all barbarians."
Tim McDaniel                 Applied Dynamics Int'l.; Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Internet: mcdaniel at adi.com                UUCP: {uunet,sharkey}!amara!mcdaniel