Re: Use func(void) for functions with no parameters

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Use func(void) for functions with no parameters
Date: 2025-12-03 15:15:41
Message-ID: 640317.1764774941@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I noticed the only changes here are for `static` definitions. Are we
> just more careful with normal functions, or does the compiler complain
> more easily about such "incomplete" definitions when they're in
> headers or need to be linked against?

Some years ago we had a buildfarm animal that would complain about
this construct, so the tree used to be clean. Probably it's just
chance that these have only snuck into local functions.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-12-03 15:17:28 Re: Cleanup shadows variable warnings, round 1
Previous Message Ignat Remizov 2025-12-03 15:14:47 Re: [PATCH] Add enable_copy_program GUC to control COPY PROGRAM