Bruno David Rodrigues wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-06-13 at 22:34, Stipe Tolj wrote: > > Oded Arbel wrote: > > > > > > Hi. > > > > > > Just had a talk with my resident GCC guru, and his suggestion (which seems to >work for me) is to #define the functions as nothing, i.e. > > > #define func_name(a) > > > thats it. nothing after that. now GCC is happy :-) > > > > Hmm, did you test the resulting bearerbox at least?! > > > > I'm not quite sure, but there are dependancies to the func_name() > > somewhere else and this may conflict if the macro return simply > > nothing. > > You have to return its own parameter because there's functions > somewhere like ocstr_destroy(gw_claim_area(xpto)) > > I'll apply this patch if you agree:
Bruno, look good to me and +1 for this. Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 D�sseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- wapme.net - wherever you are
