| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f |
| X-Trace-PostClient-IP: | 68.147.225.57 |
| From: | Brian Inglis <Brian DOT Inglis AT SystematicSW DOT Invalid> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
| Subject: | Re: Turbo Vision compile problems |
| Organization: | Systematic Software |
| Message-ID: | <14hpt3h213d3r2bj19a5keujfjdsplb9s0@4ax.com> |
| References: | <cs6dnVyUg4CvO03anZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d AT comcast DOT com> <47d1a913$0$21924$9b4e6d93 AT newsspool2 DOT arcor-online DOT net> <cvydnaXOnKzHa0_anZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d AT comcast DOT com> <47d30654$0$21931$9b4e6d93 AT newsspool2 DOT arcor-online DOT net> <rY6dnWq_tNXfyU7anZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d AT comcast DOT com> <47d458b1$0$25507$9b4e6d93 AT newsspool1 DOT arcor-online DOT net> <e0feb3e2-4106-4828-9570-3e8090bf9611 AT i7g2000prf DOT googlegroups DOT com> <80a468cd-0b97-4461-b63c-f0c81545cc41 AT i7g2000prf DOT googlegroups DOT com> |
| X-Newsreader: | Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American) |
| MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
| Lines: | 23 |
| Date: | Sun, 16 Mar 2008 07:04:35 GMT |
| NNTP-Posting-Host: | 64.59.135.176 |
| X-Complaints-To: | abuse AT shaw DOT ca |
| X-Trace: | pd7urf2no 1205651075 64.59.135.176 (Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:04:35 MDT) |
| NNTP-Posting-Date: | Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:04:35 MDT |
| To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
| DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
| Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:19:17 -0700 (PDT) in comp.os.msdos.djgpp,
jmichae3 AT yahoo DOT com wrote:
>do you think tvision could be brought up to 4.2-3 standards? usually
>what the problem is during the compile is a string literal bsing used
>in a char * and apparently GCC 4.2-3 chokes on it. I know it's not
>proper, but wouldn't it be fixed if those were changed to
>const_cast<char*>("blahblah") instead of "blahblah"?
Try removing compile flags -Werror, -pedantic, and -ansi if used, and
add -std=c89 to see if that eliminates compile failures.
The first option mentioned changes all warnings into errors, so all
warning options used e.g. -W... increase the likelihood of compile
failures.
If the code is not GCC clean, you will get some or evan a lot of
warnings, but unless the code is really bad, as in causing undefined
behaviour, you should not get compilation failures.
--
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Brian DOT Inglis AT CSi DOT com (Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca)
fake address use address above to reply
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |