Message-ID:	<3EA3932B.3450CD2F@acm.org>
From:	Eric Sosman <esosman AT acm DOT org>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: __builtin_va_list bug?
References:	<0ab801c306bf$4dacb430$0600000a AT broadpark DOT no> <3EA26C19 DOT 81D82449 AT acm DOT org> <3EA2B8D1 DOT 643143D4 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Lines:	33
Date:	Mon, 21 Apr 2003 11:43:27 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	12.91.11.16
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT worldnet DOT att DOT net
X-Trace:	bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1050925407 12.91.11.16 (Mon, 21 Apr 2003 11:43:27 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Mon, 21 Apr 2003 11:43:27 GMT
Organization:	AT&T Worldnet
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Richard Dawe wrote:
> 
> Hello.
> 
> Eric Sosman wrote:
> >
> > Gisle Vanem wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm porting some code from Watcom to gcc/djgpp and encountered
> > > tons of warnings on illegal use of va_arg(). So I cooked up a little
> > > test:
> > >
> > > #include <stdarg.h>
> > > char x;
> > > void foo (va_list arg)
> >
> >     Hold on; stop right there.  You've included <stdarg.h>, but you're
> > using the argument list declaration from the pre-Standard <varargs.h>
> > (or <vararg.h> with some compilers).  The two are not the same, they
> > are not interchangeable, and they are *definitely* not miscible.
> [snip]
> 
> Are you sure that's happening? [...]

    Um, er, "Upon further review" as they say in (American) football,
no I'm not sure.  I read the original too hastily, got myself confused,
and apologize if I've propagated my own confusion to others.

    Gotta go; time for my daily self-administered dope slap.

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman AT acm DOT org

- Raw text -