Considering the following cdecl examples:
cdecl> explain void(*signal(int, void (*)(int)))(int)
declare signal as function (int, pointer to function (int) returning void) returning pointer to function (int) returning void
cdecl> explain void (*)(int)
syntax error
I’m aware of the ‘human’ way to interpret void (*)(int) by trying to add imaginary identifier to the proper location, but wonder how compiler systematically determines it, obviously cdecl can’t.
>Solution :
The C standard defines how to interpret type names without an identifier in §6.7.7 Type names:
¶2 In several contexts, it is necessary to specify a type. This is accomplished using a type name, which is syntactically a declaration for a function or an object of that type that omits the identifier.
There’s also a set of grammar productions that defines how this works.