As for an update, I made the mistake and looked at the first definition of
the function that is used at the lines mentioned in memory.c. As I look
closer, I see that these functions are converted to "0" for non-debugged
versions. Thus the statement from the compiler is correct but there is no
problems. As for the static char, I just initialized it to "".
David
David Thompson wrote:
> I'm starting to clean up the libdx code as mentioned in an earlier
> statement. I have found some real oddities and would like someone to
> explain some things if they could. I know "C" and "C++" but I'm not sure
> about some of the syntax that the compiler is also questioning. For
> example, in message.c line 171 the following exists.
>
> static char _ErrorMessage[2000] = { NULL };
>
> What the hey? A static char array is going to have an address (you don't
> want that address as NULL). I think what they are trying to do is say
> start it out initialized as something, but what? If you want the whole
> array initialized to something, how exactly would you do that (I've
> always used calloc).
>
> As I clean things up, I'm getting more and more core dumps. I think that
> there is definitely some memory problems with this code. At some places,
> I'm suprised that it compiles and runs. Its as if the functions were
> almost written and then used. One place that does have me really
> concerned is in memory.c. I get the following warnings from the
> compiler:
>
> memory.c: In function `getfree':
> memory.c:647: warning: statement with no effect
> memory.c: In function `getpool':
> memory.c:669: warning: statement with no effect
> memory.c: In function `amalloc':
> memory.c:819: warning: statement with no effect
> memory.c:822: warning: statement with no effect
> memory.c:833: warning: statement with no effect
> memory.c:841: warning: statement with no effect
> memory.c: In function `afree':
> memory.c:858: warning: statement with no effect
>
> If you look at those statements, they are trying to increment some kind
> of counter (ie I think its the memory used, etc.) But the compiler is
> telling me that this isn't happening (eeeeooooowww!!) Somebody please
> look at this code and tell me why?!
>
> David
