void foo(void);

That is the correct way to say "no parameters" in C, and it also works in C++.

But:

void foo();

Means different things in C and C++! In C it means "could take any number of parameters of unknown types", and in C++ it means the same as foo(void).

Variable argument list functions are inherently un-typesafe and should be avoided where possible.

C and C++ are different in this respect.

C 2011 Online Standard

6.7.6.3 Function declarators (including prototypes)
...
10 The special case of an unnamed parameter of type void as the only item in the list specifies that the function has no parameters.
...
14 An identifier list declares only the identifiers of the parameters of the function. An empty list in a function declarator that is part of a definition of that function specifies that the function has no parameters. The empty list in a function declarator that is not part of a definition of that function specifies that no information about the number or types of the parameters is supplied.¹⁴⁵⁾

In short, an empty parameter list in a function declaration indicates that the function takes an unspecified number of parameters, while an empty parameter list in a function definition indicates that the function takes no parameters.

T foo( void ); // declaration, foo takes no parameters
T bar();       // declaration, bar takes an *unspecified* number of parameters

T foo( void ) { ... } // definition, foo takes no parameters
T bar() { ... }       // definition, bar takes no parameters

As far as C is concerned, you should never use an empty identifier list in a function declaration or definition. If a function is not meant to take any parameters, specify that by using void in the parameter list.

Online C++ standard

8.3.5 Functions [dcl.fct]
...
4 The parameter-declaration-clause determines the arguments that can be specified, and their processing, when the function is called. [ Note: the parameter-declaration-clause is used to convert the arguments specified on the function call; see 5.2.2. — end note ] If the parameter-declaration-clause is empty, the function takes no arguments. A parameter list consisting of a single unnamed parameter of non-dependent type void is equivalent to an empty parameter list. Except for this special case, a parameter shall not have type cv void. If the parameter-declaration-clause terminates with an ellipsis or a function parameter pack (14.5.3), the number of arguments shall be equal to or greater than the number of parameters that do not have a default argument and are not function parameter packs. Where syntactically correct and where “...” is not part of an abstract-declarator, “, ...” is synonymous with “...”. [Example: the declaration

    int printf(const char*, ...);

declares a function that can be called with varying numbers and types of arguments.

    printf("hello world");
    printf("a=%d b=%d", a, b);

However, the first argument must be of a type that can be converted to a const char* — end example ] [ Note: The standard header <cstdarg> contains a mechanism for accessing arguments passed using the ellipsis (see 5.2.2 and 18.10). — end note ]

In the case of C++, an empty parameter list in either a declaration or a definition indicates that the function takes no arguments, and is equivalent to using a parameter list of void.

void * is a generic pointer which can point to any object type. The above function can take a pointer to any type and can return a pointer to any type.

A generic pointer can be used if it is not sure about the data type of data inputted by the user.

Example: The following function will print any data type provided the user input about the type of data

void funct(void *a, int z)
{
    if(z==1)
        printf("%d",*(int*)a); // If user inputs 1, then it means the data is an integer and type  casting is done accordingly.
    else if(z==2)
        printf("%c",*(char*)a); // Typecasting for character pointer.
    else if(z==3)
        printf("%f",*(float*)a); // Typecasting for float pointer
}

Basically it means "nothing" or "no type"

There are 3 basic ways that void is used:

1. Function argument: int myFunc(void) -- the function takes nothing.

2. Function return value: void myFunc(int) -- the function returns nothing

3. Generic data pointer: void* data -- 'data' is a pointer to data of unknown type, and cannot be dereferenced

Note: the void in a function argument is optional in C++, so int myFunc() is exactly the same as int myFunc(void), and it is left out completely in C#. It is always required for a return value.

If you don't have a forward declaration of your function before the place of usage, the compiler will create implicit declaration for you - with the signature int input(). It will take the name of the function you called, it will assume that the function is returning int, and it can accept any arguments (as Bartek noted in the comment).

For this function, the implicit declaration matches the real declaration, so you don't have problems. However, you should always be careful about this, and you should always prefer forward declarations instead of implicit ones (no matter if they are same or not). So, instead of just having forward declaration of the void prime() function (assuming that you will use it somewhere), you should also have a forward declaration of int input().

To see how can you pass any number of the arguments, consider this:

#include <stdio.h>

// Takes any number of the arguments
int foo();

// Doesn't takes any arguments
int bar(void)
{
    printf("Hello from bar()!\n");
    return 0;
}

int main()
{
    // Both works

    // However, this will print junk as you're not pushing
    // Any arguments on the stack - but the compiler will assume you are
    foo();

    // This will print 1, 2, 3
    foo(1, 2, 3);

    // Works
    bar();

    // Doesn't work
    // bar(1, 2, 3);

    return 0;
}

// Definition
int foo(int i, int j, int k)
{
    printf("%d %d %d\n", i, j, k);
    return 0;
}

So, inside the definition of the function you're describing function arguments. However, declaration of the function is telling the compiler not to do any checks on the parameters.