Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Richard Heathfield <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 09:20:42 +0000
Ian Collins said:
Richard Heathfield wrote:
Ian Collins said:
My C compiler gave several screens of errors and warning before giving
up.
Try it again, fixing the trivial error on line 20
Don't bother - it isn't an error.
One good reason for passing C though a C++ compiler:
"/tmp/x.c", line 16: Error: Cannot use const char[82] to initialize
char[81].
Oh yes you can. Not in C++, true - but this is comp.lang.c, not
comp.lang.c++, and the code I posted is C, not C++.
Read the code more carefully. I think you jumped to a false conclusion.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Ian Collins
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- References:
- Simplicity has a future
- From: jacob navia
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Tomás
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: jacob navia
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Tomás
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Tomás
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Harald van Dijk
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Ian Collins
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Simplicity has a future
- From: Ian Collins
- Simplicity has a future
- Prev by Date: Re: Simplicity has a future
- Next by Date: Re: malloc() implementation
- Previous by thread: Re: Simplicity has a future
- Next by thread: Re: Simplicity has a future
- Index(es):