On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 18:34, Dossy wrote: > It's not overly aggressive and it's likely not buggy. It's telling you > that you have prototypes which don't match the function definitions, and > worse, the prototypes coerce a different promotion of types than the > function definition would. These are good warnings to have turned on > and *mostly* safe to ignore, but they are clearly sources of potential > bugs in edge cases where inputs are expected to be a certain type based > on the way the function definition is written, but due to the prototype, > the values being fed in are a different type because of the promotion > caused by the prototypes.
Yes! there is a definite problem, although being dumb at C, I was unable to pin down the exact problem and how to fix it, but the defined types seems to have changed, or was different, between what was in the solid driver and what is in odbc. I'll take another stab when I get a chance. tom jackson -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
