Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My explanation was a reply to a suggestion to remove the 'const' in > the structure definition. My fault. The code that I should have shown was without the 'const'. With gcc 2.95.3 and 'gcc -O -g -Werror -Wall -W -Wcast-qual -c foo.c' I don't get any errors with the const-less program (below). I was wondering if this is something that has changed in recent gcc. /assar struct validation_fun { char *name; void *fun; int dyn; }; struct validation_fun val_init[] = { {"init", 0, 0} }; To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: free() and const warnings Warner Losh
- Re: free() and const warnings Peter Pentchev
- Re: free() and const warnings Thomas David Rivers
- Re: free() and const warnings Peter Pentchev
- Re: free() and const warnings Thomas David Rivers
- Re: free() and const warnings Peter Pentchev
- Re: free() and const warnings Thomas David Rivers
- Re: free() and const warnings T. William Wells
- Re: free() and const warnings Assar Westerlund
- Re: free() and const warnings Peter Pentchev
- Re: free() and const warnings Assar Westerlund
- Re: free() and const warnings Peter Pentchev
- Re: free() and const warnings Mike Smith
- Re: free() and const warnings Thomas David Rivers
- Re: free() and const warnings Matt Dillon
- Re: free() and const warnings Matt Dillon
- Re: free() and const warnings Matt Dillon