josef@augs.ccs.imp.com (Josef Egloff) (08/09/90)
since a couple of month I own manx c v5.0a. in the includefile functions.h are the prototypes of most system functions included, but there are some bugs (I think). the functions Examine() and ExNext are not correct. the include file reads long Examine (BPTR lock, BPTR FileInfoBlock); and long ExNext (BPTR lock, BPTR FileInfoBlock); but this crashes the system with a disk corrupt requester, I think the prototypes should be like this long Examine (BPTR lock, struct FileInfoBlock *fib); and long ExNext (BPTR lock, struct FileInfoBlock *fib); is this correct? I hope, I use it now in my program and it works! has anybody had the same problem to? are there more such bugs in aztec 5.0a? if someone has more fixes please send them to me. cu josef -- < Josef Egloff | USENET: josef@augs.ccs.imp.com > < Pfaffnernweg 19 | PATH: impch!accsys!augs!josef > < CH - 4852 Rothrist | CBMNET: cbmswi!augs1!jegloff > < Switzerland | AUGS: as SYSOP (acc #1) >
dick@woodwrk.UUCP (Richard H. Wood) (08/11/90)
>In article <josef.101403@augs.ccs.imp.com> josef@augs.ccs.imp.com (Josef Egloff) writes: >...in the includefile functions.h...there are some >bugs (I think). the functions Examine() and ExNext are not correct. > >the include file reads > >long Examine (BPTR lock, BPTR FileInfoBlock); >and >long ExNext (BPTR lock, BPTR FileInfoBlock); > >... I think the prototypes should be like this > >long Examine (BPTR lock, struct FileInfoBlock *fib); >and >long ExNext (BPTR lock, struct FileInfoBlock *fib); > >is this correct? ...are there more such bugs in aztec 5.0a? Yes, that's correct. And yes, there are other bugs in 5.0a includes. Here's what they actually look like in Aztec 5.0b, functions.h: long Examine(BPTR lock, struct FileInfoBlock *fileInfoBlock); and long ExNext(BPTR lock, struct FileInfoBlock *fileInfoBlock); Try to upgrade to Aztec 5.0c. I understand it's the same as 5.0b...they just changed the installation program in 5.0c, as I understand it. I rebuilt MG3a with 5.0c includes and had NONE of the warnings which the (MG) documentation indicated were benign, but none-the-less a result of bad prototypes in 5.0a. However, I've had to fall back to the 5.0a COMPILER to get MG3a to actually run. Anybody else run into this? >cu josef > >-- >< Josef Egloff | USENET: josef@augs.ccs.imp.com > >< Pfaffnernweg 19 | PATH: impch!accsys!augs!josef > >< CH - 4852 Rothrist | CBMNET: cbmswi!augs1!jegloff > >< Switzerland | AUGS: as SYSOP (acc #1) > -- | | uunet!digi!woodwrk!dick Dick Wood | Become an ORGAN DONOR : dwood@digi.lonestar.org --
lfk@oslo.key.amdahl.com (Lynn Kerby) (08/15/90)
In article <dick.3591@woodwrk.UUCP> dick@woodwrk.UUCP (Richard H. Wood) writes: >I rebuilt MG3a with 5.0c includes and had NONE of the warnings which >the (MG) documentation indicated were benign, but none-the-less a >result of bad prototypes in 5.0a. However, I've had to fall back to >the 5.0a COMPILER to get MG3a to actually run. Anybody else run into >this? I have run into this as well. It can be fixed by waiting for MANX to fix their prototyping problems in 5.0b. The bugs are due to the use of both K&R style function declarations and prototypes. This was a new bug introduced in 5.0b. I really thought it was going to work especially when all the warnings went away with the new includes. I have been trying to find out when the bugs will be fixed so that I can send Mike some patches (I did most of the work getting MG3a to compile with both MANX compilers) or just some new instructions. If it isn't going to be fixed within a month or so I suppose I will track down all the bugs (YEEECCCCHHHHH!) and distribute some patches. > -- | | uunet!digi!woodwrk!dick > Dick Wood | Become an ORGAN DONOR : dwood@digi.lonestar.org > -- -- Lynn Kerby, Amdahl Corporation: lfk@key.amdahl.com or {...}amdahl!key!lfk <<<<---------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------->>>> <<<< Any and all opinions expressed herein are my own. My >>>> <<<< employer doesn't pay me for my opinion! >>>>