Re: Recursion, Yo

On 11/04/2024 02:18, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 16:46:43 +0200, David Brown wrote:
 

Just for your entertainment, with C++ lambdas this is now legal code:
>
void foo(void) {
[](){}();
}

 C programmer still has habit of writing “(void)” when C++ allows “()”
instead.

I do that sometimes, yes.  I could argue that I think it is better to be explicit than implicit, but it's just my fingers on automatic.  The kinds of programs I work on can rarely be pure C++ - there's always lots of C code too, and it's often useful to write code in a way that is suitable for both C and C++.
In this particular case, of course, there's not much advantage to having a C-style function declaration!

 Does the latest C spec now also take “()” to mean “no args” (synonymous
with “(void)”) instead of “unspecified args”?

It does, yes, in C23.  If you want to declare a function with no information about the number or type of parameters, you can now write "void foo(...);".  (Prior to C23 you needed at least one normal typed parameter before the ellipsis.)