tahonermann added a comment.

> I think it's debatable whether this is a bug or not
For C99 through C17, I kind of agree, but for C2x (where the warning is still 
issued with `-Wstrict-prototypes`), my understanding is that `void foo(void)` 
and `void foo()` are equivalent; there is no unprototyped declaration. I think 
the diagnostic should at least be suppressed for C2x since we don't want to 
encourage programmers to explicitly add `void` when targeting that standard.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D122895/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D122895

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to