Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:32:20 04/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 04, 2000 at 14:36:10, Frank Phillips wrote:
>On April 03, 2000 at 22:35:47, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>[Snip]
>>>It is indicative of an uninitialized variable. A procedure call such as the
>>ones above simply stomp on the stack before your code gets to use the value
>>that was not initialized.
>>
>>you might try gcc -Wall -O2 to let it build a dependency graph and look for
>>such problems. If it sees a path from the top of the procedure to the bottom,
>>where any variable is referenced before it is initialized (local variables
>>only) it will give you a warning...
>
>Bob/Christophe
>
>Just as you predicted, an uninitialised variable. Everything is now back to
>normal.
>
>Easy when you know how……… Thanks, this was driving me insane.
>
>The gcc Wall option is very useful and found the extra variable easy. I had
>looked and looked and looked and………………….
>
>Frank
I suggest to have -Wall all the time. Do not change the warning level to match
the needs of your sources. Change your sources so -Wall detects NO warning, and
it will save yourself from a lot of trouble.
Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.