A strange function definition! is it legal???

[Antigloss]

/*nothing here*/getsum(i)
int i;  /*what's this???*/
{
    /*... ...*/
}

is it legal??? is it in the standard???

[Antigloss]

The following code is strange for me. I don't specify a return value to function getsum, but it turns out that sum is actually returned to function main. why?

#include <stdio.h>

getsum(i)
int i;
{
	int sum = i;
	return sum;
}

int main( void )
{
	printf( "%d", getsum(10) );

	return 0;
}

[cwr]

That style is equivalent to:

getsum(int i)
{
    int sum = i;
    return sum;
}

It was used by K&R originally, before ANSI C.

[Antigloss]

That style is equivalent to:

getsum(int i)
{
    int sum = i;
    return sum;
}

It was used by K&R originally, before ANSI C.

But how can it return a value since we don't specify one?

And what are the benifits for using

getsum(i)
int i
{
    int sum = i;
    return sum;
}

[Salem]

> But how can it return a value since we don't specify one?
If anything is missing, K&R 'C' assumed int
So you have in effect 'int getsum( int i );

> And what are the benifits for using
None at all - ANSI-C prototypes make for a much better life.

[loko]

The following code is strange for me. I don't specify a return value to function getsum, but it turns out that sum is actually returned to function main. why?

#include <stdio.h>

getsum(i)
int i;
{
	int sum = i;
	return sum;
}

int main( void )
{
	printf( "%d", getsum(10) );

	return 0;
}

Wow it compiled That kind of style is confusing i wont use that.

[cwr]

Yes, sorry, I missed the implicit int return confusion. I still used to older style code omitting the int that my brain immediately glossed past it as quite normal.

And, indeed, it's a much better idea to always have an explicit return type.