Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 10:28:22 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Wieslaw Bela <wiechu AT aurora DOT put DOT poznan DOT pl>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: A bug
In-Reply-To: <199907271444.QAA03635@aurora.put.poznan.pl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990728102803.15288H-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Wieslaw Bela wrote:

>   I want to report a bug that I've  found while making the attached
> project in DJGPP.

Please don't post large binary files here.  If you want to report a
bug, post the shortest source file, or a part of a source, that shows
what your code is doing, and a description of the effect that seems to
be incorrect.  People who read this group don't usually have time to
unzip large binary attachments and look into complex programs.

> I don't know where is the problem, but I've tried many
> things, including changing the order of variables, size of arrays, their
> names (I also tried to compile on two different machines), and the effect
> is always the same: the memory for (static) arrays "wyglad" and "next"
> isn't allocated (when I debug it, size of them is 0)

This usually means some bug in your program.  Please post a short
example (as part of the message text, not as binary attachment).