Hi Joseph, On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 12:04:47PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > > > I don't think we should support any of these. We tightened up various > > > cases of void in parameter lists in C2y (constraint "A parameter > > > declaration shall not specify a void type, except for the special case of > > > a single unnamed parameter of type void with no storage-class specifier, > > > no type qualifier, and no following ellipsis terminator.", > > > > > > > > > replacing > > > previous implicit UB), > > > > Could you please mention the paper number that did this? It would be > > useful to read it. > > This was N3344 (alternative 1 accepted in Minneapolis).
I don't think any of what I proposed conflicts in any way N3344. In f(void; void) there's only one unnamed parameter of type void, both in the list of forward declarations and in the list of actual declarations. Have a lovely night! Alex -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es> Use port 80 (that is, <...:80/>).
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
