complain about incompatibility of gcc with K&R

[superarthur]

correct me if I am wrong
I am going through K&R really slowly (spent too much time on Pokemon Heartgold :P)
I am at section 1.9, where the code it shows create a new function called getline. I typed the code and tried compiling it and didn't work, giving "error: conflicting types for ‘getline’"
when I change all my "getline" to "getline2", it worked.
so i assume that there is a getline function already in gcc compiler

how can gcc not be compatible with the C programming bible
(I got frustrated every time I spent hours to debug my program, but solving the problem with a simple solution in the end.)

[CptPicard]

man getline:

GETLINE(3) Linux Programmer's Manual GETLINE(3)

NAME
getline, getdelim - delimited string input

SYNOPSIS
#include <stdio.h>

ssize_t getline(char **lineptr, size_t *n, FILE *stream);

ssize_t getdelim(char **lineptr, size_t *n, int delim, FILE *stream);

Feature Test Macro Requirements for glibc (see feature_test_macros(7)):

Before glibc 2.10:
getline(), getdelim(): _GNU_SOURCE

Since glibc 2.10:
getline(), getdelim(): _POSIX_C_SOURCE >= 200809 || _XOPEN_SOURCE >= 700

DESCRIPTION
getline() reads an entire line from stream, storing the address of the buffer containing the text into *lineptr. The buffer is null-terminated and
includes the newline character, if one was found.

...



There really is nothing in the compiler per se. Compiler just compiles the language. All the functions are in the standard library, or other libraries.

K&R is somewhat old... it may have some incompatibilities with modern Linux std libs.

[dwhitney67]

K&R is somewhat old... it may have some incompatibilities with modern Linux std libs.

Yes, that is correct. However if the OP wants to program identically to the K&R book, he/she could probably get away with it by specifying the -std=c89 GCC compiler flag when compiling his source code. (not that I recommend this.)

[rabidbadger]

Yes, that is correct. However if the OP wants to program identically to the K&R book, he/she could probably get away with it by specifying the -std=c89 GCC compiler flag when compiling his source code. (not that I recommend this.)

I'm really curious to understand why you wouldn't recommend that the OP writes -- and tells his compiler to process -- standards compliant code (albeit an old, portable standard)...?

To the OP, you should also find that the command 'c89' is already aliased on your system to invoke GCC in ANSI compatible mode.

[beradero]

This works fine in FreeBSD.. I'm studing C by K&R too, and I had the same problem..
Exercise 1-10 is also a problem in Linux because it don't produce the ^H (backspace), but it works fine in FreeBSD (Ctrl+V Backspace produces the ^H, but in Linux the same sequence produces ^?).. So I'm using FreeBSD to do my K&R exercises..