http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #24 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-03-16 09:38:37 UTC --- On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, joe at mcknight dot de wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650 > > --- Comment #23 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 17:05:24 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #22) > > > Compare it to: > > > > > > typedef int mytype; > > > int myfunc2(mytype var) { > > > return 1; > > > }; > > > > > > which outputs > > > > > > static int myfunc2 (mytype); > > > > > > i.e. returns the newly created type as well. > > > > That's by design. > > Then what is the design rule behind it, for me it looks inconsistent to once > inline the original type and another time use the newly created type. > > > > > It outputs "static void (*Handler) (int, void *) GetFunctionPointer > > > (void);" > > > > It's not designed to do that. The functions are for debugging and > > diagnostic output only, they are not supposed to generate valid C. > > I know, but instead of creating a new language, wouldn't it be good to just > stick to the C grammar to describe what is being seen? > > > > Was the debug output helpful with respect to the wrong variadic output? Well, it confirmed that void_list_node is not used, but I can't reproduce this fact.
