On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:55:22PM -0800, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > From: "Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 11:08:14AM -0800, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >... > > > Dirtier than ****, but it -does- compile. Lots of emits on misparsing the > > > const (non-recursive const behavior.) Ohy vey. > > > > I'm not sure that I understand the problem. Is it that MSVC doesn't like > > seeing two "const" markers in a type? > > src\lib\apr\misc\unix\getopt.c(65) : warning C4090: 'function' : different > 'const' qualifiers > src\lib\apr\misc\unix\getopt.c(65) : warning C4022: 'memcpy' : pointer > mismatch for actual parameter 1 > > src\modules\mpm\winnt\service.c(605) : warning C4090: 'function' : different > 'const' qualifiers > src\modules\mpm\winnt\service.c(605) : warning C4022: 'memcpy' : pointer > mismatch for actual parameter 1 > > and ditto at (609), (706), (709), (713) and (1072)
Euh... those warnings are wrong. We pass in "const char **" for memcpy()'s first parameters which is a "void *". The two "should be" compatible. Grr... anybody have any ideas on how best to solve the problem? (seems like a problem with the compiler itself) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
