From:	Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id:	<200106091726.TAA04653@mother.ludd.luth.se>
Subject:	Re: Compiler options for djdev build
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Date:	Sat, 9 Jun 2001 19:26:07 +0200 (MEST)
Cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com (DJGPP-WORKERS)
In-Reply-To:	<5567-Sat09Jun2001201505+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jun 09, 2001 08:15:06 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> What I was saying was that if you change `todigit' to accept an int as
> an argument, *fmt will be promoted to an int when it is passed to
> `todigit'.  This promotion is done by default if `todigit's
> declaration is not visible to the compiler.

Yes. I understand this part.

What I'm saying is todigit() is declared before its use. todigit()
expects a char as its argument (in the original code). Ok?

Why is gcc complaining? 

Because we used the flag -Wconversion. 

Ok?


To sum it up: I won't use the flag as it does more harm than good.


Right,

						MartinS

- Raw text -