Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel

• Next message: J Sloan: "Re: Testing the effects of the low latency patch"
• Previous message: ivan: "Physical memory versus detected memory 2.4.7-10"
• In reply to: Timothy Covell: "Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel"
• Next in thread: Helge Hafting: "Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 05:09:45PM -0600, Timothy Covell wrote:

> My mistake, I was looking at the ouput of my "char x;" example,
> which IMHO is even worse.
>
> covell@xxxxxx ~>gcc -Wall foo.c
> foo.c: In function `main':
> foo.c:17: warning: implicit declaration of function `exit'

and it's still your mistake. Try -O2 as well.

john

-- 
"ALL television is children's television."
	- Richard Adler 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: J Sloan: "Re: Testing the effects of the low latency patch"
• Previous message: ivan: "Physical memory versus detected memory 2.4.7-10"
• In reply to: Timothy Covell: "Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel"
• Next in thread: Helge Hafting: "Re: RFC: booleans and the kernel"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:00:27 EST