Reason for ISO ; warning

[pemo]

[Warning] ISO C does not allow extra ';' outside of a function

int n;;

int main(void)
{
....
}

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why ISO C does not allow this, but
apparently ANSI c99 does?

Ta

[pete]

pemo wrote:

[Warning] ISO C does not allow extra ';' outside of a function

int n;;
That's an object definition,
followed by what looks like an empty statement.

int main(void)
{
...
}

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why ISO C does not allow this,
Statements are only allowed inside of function definitions.
but apparently ANSI c99 does?

I don't know so much about C99.

--
pete

[Richard Heathfield]

pemo said:

[Warning] ISO C does not allow extra ';' outside of a function

int n;;

int main(void)
{
...
}

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why ISO C does not allow this,
It's the grammar. I presume you mean C90, because...
but apparently ANSI c99 does?

....here you mean ISO C99. ANSI didn't ratify the revised Standard until
2000, so it's ANSI C2000 or, if you prefer, ANSI C00.

I wasn't aware that executable code was allowed outside a function in C99.
C&V?

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)

[pete]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

I wasn't aware that executable code was
allowed outside a function in C99.
C&V?

External definitions of objects are executable code.

--
pete

[pemo]

"pete" <pf*****@mindsp ring.com> wrote in message
news:43******** **@mindspring.c om...

pemo wrote:

[Warning] ISO C does not allow extra ';' outside of a function

int n;;

That's an object definition,
followed by what looks like an empty statement.

int main(void)
{
...
}

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why ISO C does not allow this,

Statements are only allowed inside of function definitions.

Yes, that makes sense - ta.

[pemo]

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote in message
news:dn******** **@nwrdmz01.dmz .ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

pemo said:

[Warning] ISO C does not allow extra ';' outside of a function

int n;;

int main(void)
{
...
}

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why ISO C does not allow this,

It's the grammar. I presume you mean C90, because...

but apparently ANSI c99 does?

...here you mean ISO C99. ANSI didn't ratify the revised Standard until
2000, so it's ANSI C2000 or, if you prefer, ANSI C00.

I wasn't aware that executable code was allowed outside a function in C99.
C&V?

Interesting!

It's the grammar. I presume you mean C90

'I' didn't come into it Richard, the message came from gcc and appears
with -Wall -pedantic -std=c99

So, I assume c99 is what you're caling c00?

[Ian Malone]

pemo wrote:

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote in message
news:dn******** **@nwrdmz01.dmz .ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

pemo said:

but apparently ANSI c99 does?

^^^^
This bit

...here you mean ISO C99. ANSI didn't ratify the revised Standard until
2000, so it's ANSI C2000 or, if you prefer, ANSI C00.

<snip>


'I' didn't come into it Richard, the message came from gcc and appears
with -Wall -pedantic -std=c99

So, I assume c99 is what you're caling c00?

That gcc option means ISO C99, there is no ANSI C99, which seems to be
what R Heathfield was getting at.

--
imalone

[pemo]

"Ian Malone" <ib***@cam.ac.u k> wrote in message
news:43******** ******@cam.ac.u k...

pemo wrote:

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote in message
news:dn******** **@nwrdmz01.dmz .ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

pemo said:

but apparently ANSI c99 does? ^^^^
This bit

...here you mean ISO C99. ANSI didn't ratify the revised Standard until
2000, so it's ANSI C2000 or, if you prefer, ANSI C00.

<snip>

'I' didn't come into it Richard, the message came from gcc and appears
with -Wall -pedantic -std=c99

So, I assume c99 is what you're caling c00?

That gcc option means ISO C99, there is no ANSI C99, which seems to be
what R Heathfield was getting at.

Ah, ok, so is -ansi the ANSI variant then?

[Richard Heathfield]

pemo said:

the message came from gcc and appears
with -Wall -pedantic -std=c99
Despite the flag name, gcc does not fully support C99.
So, I assume c99 is what you're caling c00?

If you mean the ISO C Standard, it's C99. If you mean the ANSI C Standard,
it's C00.

1989: ANSI C (C89).
1990: ISO C (C90) - this is effectively identical to C89, the only changes I
know about being section number changes.
1995: There was a minor mod to the Standard which, I believe, was adopted by
both ISO and ANSI.
1999: ISO C (C99).
2000: ANSI C (C00 or C2000) - this is effectively identical to C99.

Most people use C89 when they mean either C89 or C90, and C99 when they mean
either C99 or C00/C2000 - despite the fact that C89 refers to the ANSI
Standard and C99 refers to the ISO Standard.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)

[Richard Tobin]

In article <dn**********@n ews.ox.ac.uk>, pemo <us***********@ gmail.com> wrote:

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why ISO C does not allow this, but
apparently ANSI c99 does?

Ignoring the question of what ANSI c99 is, what makes you think that it
allows it?

When GCC says that ISO C does not allow something, it probably means
that GCC allows it as an extension, not that some ANSI C version
allows it.

-- Richard