As for an update, I made the mistake and looked at the first definition of the function that is used at the lines mentioned in memory.c. As I look closer, I see that these functions are converted to "0" for non-debugged versions. Thus the statement from the compiler is correct but there is no problems. As for the static char, I just initialized it to "".
David David Thompson wrote: > I'm starting to clean up the libdx code as mentioned in an earlier > statement. I have found some real oddities and would like someone to > explain some things if they could. I know "C" and "C++" but I'm not sure > about some of the syntax that the compiler is also questioning. For > example, in message.c line 171 the following exists. > > static char _ErrorMessage[2000] = { NULL }; > > What the hey? A static char array is going to have an address (you don't > want that address as NULL). I think what they are trying to do is say > start it out initialized as something, but what? If you want the whole > array initialized to something, how exactly would you do that (I've > always used calloc). > > As I clean things up, I'm getting more and more core dumps. I think that > there is definitely some memory problems with this code. At some places, > I'm suprised that it compiles and runs. Its as if the functions were > almost written and then used. One place that does have me really > concerned is in memory.c. I get the following warnings from the > compiler: > > memory.c: In function `getfree': > memory.c:647: warning: statement with no effect > memory.c: In function `getpool': > memory.c:669: warning: statement with no effect > memory.c: In function `amalloc': > memory.c:819: warning: statement with no effect > memory.c:822: warning: statement with no effect > memory.c:833: warning: statement with no effect > memory.c:841: warning: statement with no effect > memory.c: In function `afree': > memory.c:858: warning: statement with no effect > > If you look at those statements, they are trying to increment some kind > of counter (ie I think its the memory used, etc.) But the compiler is > telling me that this isn't happening (eeeeooooowww!!) Somebody please > look at this code and tell me why?! > > David