Re: [ECOS] Dumb C question..

[Rutger Hofman <rutger at cs dot vu dot nl>]

Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Folks
>
> Can anybody figure out what the compiler does not like:
>
> /home/lunn/eCos/anoncvs-clean/packages/language/c/libc/string/current/tests/memchr.c: In function 'main':
> /home/lunn/eCos/anoncvs-clean/packages/language/c/libc/string/current/tests/memchr.c:103: warning: assignment discards qualifiers from pointer target type

The formal and actual argument differ in constness. What happens if you 
replace

   (void *)"",

with

   (const void *)"",

And what happens if you leave out the cast? String literals are of type 
char *, but I seem to remember that they can be used in places where a 
const char * is required. (The obviously correct way to handle this 
would be to make string literals of type const char *, but it is 
reported that that would break existing code.)

Many of the arguments to calls to memchr are adorned with casts. Are 
they all really necessary?

Rutger

--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss