> box.c: In function `GGI_ati_mach64_fillscreen':
> box.c:49: warning: unused variable `yadd'
>
> All such warnings should be easy to fix. Remove the unused variable, or
> stick a yadd = 0; in there somewhere so it stops complaining.
This sort of warnings procudes gcc < 3, too.
> crossblit.c: In function `crossblit_8_to_32':
> crossblit.c:263: warning: unreachable code at beginning of switch
> statement
>
> Usually occurs if you try to declare a variable inside of a switch
> statement.
> switch(foo)
> {
> int bar;
> case '......... etc..
> }
> or can be caused by a line of code after a break; like so:
> switch(foo)
> {
> case 1: printf("Hello world");
> break;
> printf("This will never be reached");
> case 2: break;
> }
>
> All "warning#" warnings appear to be deliberately set by the authors of
> the
> respective source files.
> I know of no compiler in existence that could tell you that you needed 1,
> 2, 4-bit compatibility (or whatever it said).
Yeah, that's a sort of a TODO list for the new X-target... :)
> As for the "non-system" warnings, try this thread below. It seems that
> GCC
> 3.x has a "bug"(?) that arises when you include an "include" path twice,
> either deliberately or by accident.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-07/msg00434.html
When reading this follow-up
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-07/msg00470.html
I think, that is more a feature... :)
libgii is free of these warnings, though. So we should compare the way how
libtool passes the include path's to gcc of libgii and libggi. There _must_ be
a difference, otherwise libggi would be free of these warnings, too!
> I don't do much with your GGI source, but I use GGI for some graphics work
> and like it a lot.
TNX. Do you use the latest official releases or the CVS version?
> Best of luck!
> RDB
--
CU,
Christoph Egger
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net
