Wiki says:
The
extern
keyword means \"declare without defining\". In other words, it is a way to explicitly declare a variable, or to f
This code is perfectly valid.
But any compiler is free to issue additional (informative or not) diagnostics:
(C99, 5.1.1.3p1 fn 8) "Of course, an implementation is free to produce any number of diagnostics as long as a valid program is still correctly translated."
What a compiler cannot do is not emitting a diagnostic when there is a constraint or syntax violation.
EDIT:
As devnull put in the OP question comments, Joseph Myers from gcc
team explains in a bug report questioning this diagnostic:
"This is a coding style warning - the code is valid, but extremely unidiomatic for C since "extern" is generally expected to mean that the declaration is not providing a definition of the object."
All three versions of the standard — ISO/IEC 9899:1990, ISO/IEC 9899:1999 and ISO/IEC 9899:2011 — contain an example in the section with the title External object definitions (§6.7.2 of C90, and §6.9.2 of C99 and C11) which shows:
EXAMPLE 1
int i1 = 1; // definition, external linkage static int i2 = 2; // definition, internal linkage extern int i3 = 3; // definition, external linkage int i4; // tentative definition, external linkage static int i5; // tentative definition, internal linkage
The example continues, but the extern int i3 = 3;
line clearly shows that the standard indicates that it should be allowed. Note, however, that examples in the standard are technically not 'normative' (see the foreword in the standard); they are not a definitive statement of what is and is not allowed.
That said, most people most of the time do not use extern
and an initializer.