Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!umd5!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: certain type mismatches
Message-ID: <12370@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: 8 Jul 88 15:27:29 GMT
References:  <6966@cup.portal.com> <1988Jul7.141058.20804@sq.uucp>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 13

In some article somewhere, I wrote:
>>... [execl] only ever returns -1, so declaring it as `int' is
>>somewhat pointless ...

In article <1988Jul7.141058.20804@sq.uucp> msb@sq.uucp (Mark Brader) remarks:
>But "function returning int" and "function returning void" are different
>types. ...  int execl() and (void)execl(...); is what you must say.

True enough.  What I had meant to imply, though, was that the
definition of execl() could well be changed.  This is not something
that applies to ANSI X3J11, but rather to IEEE P1003.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris