Puzzled by this behavior

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 5/31/22 8:17 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 31.05.22 22:24, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 5/31/22 4:13 PM, Max Samukha wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 31 May 2022 at 19:59:21 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is done on purpose.
>>>
>>> What's the purpose? It looks like just another atavism, reproducing 
>>> itself without any purpose.
>>
>> To make code that is ported from C compile the same as it does in C.
>>
> 
> There are local functions in C?

I mean the lookup mechanisms are the same.

But yeah, there are no local functions in C. I just figured that this is 
so the compiler doesn't have to have weird special cases for lookups.

However, thinking about it more, we *do* allow function prototypes as 
local functions. But I can't figure out a way to actually define them, 
aside from using pragma(mangle).

I think there's an opportunity here where we can allow function 
prototypes, allow definitions later, and not break existing code.

-Steve