Page History

...

Attempting to compile a program with a function declarator that does not include the appropriate type information typically generates a warning but does not prevent program compilation. These warnings should be resolved (see MSC00-AC. Compile cleanly at high warning levels).

...

Noncompliant Code Example (Non-Prototype-Format Declarators)

The non-compliant noncompliant code example uses the identifier-list form for parameter declarations.

...

Section 6.11 of the C99 standard, "Future language directions," states that "The use of function definitions with separate parameter identifier and declaration lists (not prototype-format parameter type and identifier declarators) is an obsolescent feature."

Compliant Solution (Non-Prototype-Format Declarators)

In this compliant solution, int is the type specifier, max(int a, int b) is the function declarator, and the block within the curly braces is the function body.

int max(int a, int b) {
  return a > b ? a : b;
}

...

Noncompliant Code Example (Function Prototypes)

Declaring a function without any prototype forces the compiler to assume that the correct number and type of parameters have been supplied to a function. This can result in unintended and undefined behavior.

In this non-compliant noncompliant code example, which involves two files, the definition of func() expects three parameters but is supplied only two. However, because there is no prototype for func() in the second file, the compiler assumes that the correct number of arguments has been supplied and uses the next value on the program stack as the missing third argument.

...

C99 eliminated implicit function declarations from the C language \[[ISO/IEC 9899:1999|AA. C References#ISO/IEC 9899-1999]\]. However, many compilers still allow compilation of programs containing implicitly declared functions, although they may issue a warning message. These warnings should be resolved (see [MSC00-AC. Compile cleanly at high warning levels]).

Compliant Solution (Function Prototypes)

To correct this example, the appropriate function prototype for func() should be specified in the file in which it is invoked. This allows the compiler to diagnose invalid function arguments:

...

int func(int, int, int);

func(1, 2, 3);

...

Noncompliant Code Example (Function Pointers)

If a function pointer refers to an incompatible function, invoking that function via the pointer may corrupt the process stack. As a result, unexpected data may be accessed by the called function.

In this non-compliant noncompliant code example, the function pointer fn_ptr refers to the function add(), which accepts three integer arguments. However, fn_ptr is specified to accept two integer arguments. Setting fn_ptr to refer to add() results in unexpected program behavior. This example also violates the rule DCL35-C. Do not invoke a function using a type that does not match the function definition.

int add(int x, int y, int z) {
   return x + y + z;
}

int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
   int (*fn_ptr) (int, int);
   int res;
   fn_ptr = add;
   res = fn_ptr(2, 3);  /* incorrect */
   /* ... */
   return 0;
}

Compliant Solution (Function Pointers)

To correct this example, the declaration of fn_ptr is changed to accept three arguments.

int add(int x, int y, int z) {
   return x + y + z;
}

int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
   int (*fn_ptr) (int, int, int) ;
   int res;
   fn_ptr = add;
   res = fn_ptr(2, 3, 4);
   /* ... */
   return 0;
}

Risk Assessment

Failing to include type information for function declarators can result in unexpected or unintended program behavior.

Automated Detection

The LDRA tool suite V 7.6.0 is able to can detect violations of this recommendation.

Related Vulnerabilities

Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.

References

\[[ISO/IEC 9899:1999|AA. C References#ISO/IEC 9899-1999]\] Forward and Section 6.9.1, "Function definitions"
\[[ISO/IEC PDTR 24772|AA. C References#ISO/IEC PDTR 24772]\] "IHN Type system" and "OTR Subprogram Signature Mismatch"
\[[MISRA 04|AA. C References#MISRA 04]\] Rule 8.2
\[[Spinellis 06|AA. C References#Spinellis 06]\] Section 2.6.1, "Incorrect Routine or Arguments"

...

DCL06-C. Use meaningful symbolic constants to represent literal values in program logic      02. Declarations and Initialization (DCL)       DCL08-A. Properly encode relationships in constant definitions Image Added