Skip to content
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
This project
Loading...
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
R
riscv-gcc-1
Overview
Overview
Details
Activity
Cycle Analytics
Repository
Repository
Files
Commits
Branches
Tags
Contributors
Graph
Compare
Charts
Issues
0
Issues
0
List
Board
Labels
Milestones
Merge Requests
0
Merge Requests
0
CI / CD
CI / CD
Pipelines
Jobs
Schedules
Charts
Wiki
Wiki
Snippets
Snippets
Members
Members
Collapse sidebar
Close sidebar
Activity
Graph
Charts
Create a new issue
Jobs
Commits
Issue Boards
Open sidebar
lvzhengyang
riscv-gcc-1
Commits
0b558962
Commit
0b558962
authored
Jul 02, 2002
by
Alan Modra
Committed by
Alan Modra
Jul 02, 2002
Browse files
Options
Browse Files
Download
Email Patches
Plain Diff
* README.Portability: Fix typos.
From-SVN: r55164
parent
9a81c5b7
Show whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
2 changed files
with
7 additions
and
3 deletions
+7
-3
gcc/ChangeLog
+4
-0
gcc/README.Portability
+3
-3
No files found.
gcc/ChangeLog
View file @
0b558962
2002-07-02 Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
* README.Portability: Fix typos.
2002-07-01 Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
PR target/7177
...
...
gcc/README.Portability
View file @
0b558962
...
...
@@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ myfunc (var1, var2)
This implies that if the function takes no arguments, it should be
declared and defined as follows:
int myfunc PARAMS ((void))
int myfunc PARAMS ((void))
;
int
myfunc ()
...
...
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ long and int are not the same size.
Second, if you write a function definition with no return type at
all:
operate(a, b)
operate
(a, b)
int a, b;
{
...
...
...
@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ Implicit function declarations always have return type int. So if you
correct the above definition to
void
operate(a, b)
operate
(a, b)
int a, b;
...
...
...
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment