Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do
`test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it
and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you
declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented.
This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is
guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now,
at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter
function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away).
However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay
down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must
explicitly declare it as such.
I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying
warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling
in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
As part of fixing #464, I'll need to move these pieces of code around
easily. In #220 I just kind of shoved them awkwardly in whatever
fixed function would be last called in the gamestate loop, which I
shouldn't have done as I've now had to make formal fixed-render
functions anyway. Because these fixed functions need to be called
directly before a render function, and I'm fixing the order to put
render functions in their proper place, so I need to be able to move
these around easily, and making them function calls instead of inlined
makes them easier to manipulate.
