[openbeos] Re: -Wmissing-prototypes

> "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > "Andrew Bachmann" <shatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This seems like the winning suggestion to me.  Just another wacky 
> > > C 
> > > thing.
> > > This is why I don't do drivers I guess. (heh)
> > 
> > That's not wacky, that's a useful feature. It's even something 
> > that's 
> > missing (a bug in the specs as I would see it) in C++; you cannot 
> > define a class only locally - it's always visible from the outside 
> > until you strip the symbols manually.
> 
> This is not quite correct, I can have two files separately define the
> same class with no qualifiers and have no problems linking-- or so
> it seemed in my test case.  Personally I think that declaring things
> to be static is the backwards way, [instead of explicitly granting
> visibility] but my personal opinion doesn't count for much in this
> arena. :-)

This is why mwcc is a better compiler than gcc :P
-Nathan

Other related posts: