Re: static and forward declaration

2000-05-17 Thread Sven Neumann
Hi, > >Even though -Wall is specified, gcc accepts it without even a warning. I > >don't know offhand if this behaviour is allowed by the standard. My > >personal coding style would put the declaration with initial values before > >the first use which would eliminate the two lines at the top of t

Re: static and forward declaration

2000-05-17 Thread Arnaud Masson
>CodeWarrior is correct in its message. The variables are being defined the >first time for use in the procedural_db_register() calls and then later >they are defined again but this time with initial values. Does CodeWarrior >issue the redefinition message as a warning or as an error? In CWPro 5.

Re: static and forward declaration

2000-05-17 Thread Kevin Cozens
CodeWarrior is correct in its message. The variables are being defined the first time for use in the procedural_db_register() calls and then later they are defined again but this time with initial values. Does CodeWarrior issue the redefinition message as a warning or as an error? The output from