This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Why strcpy and not strtod?

To: Robert Boehne <rboehne at ricardo-us dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Subject: Re: Why strcpy and not strtod?
From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 23:21:47 +0200
Organization: Universita' della Tuscia
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105281222430.31118-100000@mlinux.pd.infn.it> <3B125318.B682D110@unitus.it> <3B1404A0.2A98A540@ricardo-us.com>
Reply-To: pcarlini at unitus dot it

Hi,

Robert Boehne wrote:

[snip]

> I've found a similar problem with today's gcc 3.0 sources.  When I use
> it
> to compile a source file that uses strcmp() from <string.h> the
> preprocessed
> (*.ii) file has the definition from <string.h> but the compiler tells
> me:
> `strcmp' undeclared (first use this function)
> Are these problems related?

Indeed they are.

But there are already 3 or 4 PR filed in GNATS (i.e. 2767, 2977, 2989, 2992) and I'm
confident that the problem will be solved by the developers before the release.

Hold on!

P.

References:
- Why strcpy and not strtod?
  - From: Maurizio Loreti
- Re: Why strcpy and not strtod?
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: Why strcpy and not strtod?
  - From: Robert Boehne

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]