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