Thanks again, folks. Will definitely enable those checks.
cheers,
J.
On 2009-11-24, at 9:44 PM, Jens Alfke wrote:
>
> On Nov 24, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Graham Cox wrote:
>
>> The warning you want is 'possible unwanted assignment', and I think it comes
>> with the -Wall flag.
>
> Yup. I vehement
On Nov 24, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Graham Cox wrote:
> The warning you want is 'possible unwanted assignment', and I think it comes
> with the -Wall flag.
Yup. I vehemently assert that all projects should be built with -Wall and
-Werror. It will save you so much time and frustration.
—Jens
___
On 25/11/2009, at 3:35 PM, James Maxwell wrote:
> (funny that I didn't get a warning, actually... Is there any build setting
> that will protect me from a similar bought of blindness in the future?)
The warning you want is 'possible unwanted assignment', and I think it comes
with the -Wall fl
oh, thanks! I didn't know that "people" did that. But now I do!
Certainly makes sense.
cheers,
J.
On 2009-11-24, at 8:39 PM, Luke the Hiesterman wrote:
> This is why some people write if (0 == _state[i]). A mistake there will
> definitely generate a compiler error.
>
> Luke
>
> On Nov 24,
This is why some people write if (0 == _state[i]). A mistake there
will definitely generate a compiler error.
Luke
On Nov 24, 2009, at 8:35 PM, James Maxwell wrote:
how do you spell total frustration and stupidity?
how about writing:
if(_state[i] = 0)
when you really mean:
if(_state[i] ==
how do you spell total frustration and stupidity?
how about writing:
if(_state[i] = 0)
when you really mean:
if(_state[i] == 0)
how many hours did I waste trying to find that?. ugh
Certainly a simple enough way to make sure a vector isn't retained!
(funny that I didn't get a warning, a
Hey Folks,
Thanks for the responses. I'm doing some testing to specifically isolate the
instance that's giving me the problem, so "self" should definitely be the right
one. There's no persistence stuff written at all yet, so it can't be
initWithCoder. I'm using a totally vanilla synthesized acc
On Nov 24, 2009, at 6:20 PM, James Maxwell wrote:
> I have a couple of int* arrays I'm using as instance variables - they're
> declared in my @interface section, and inited using malloc when I init the
> object (and free()'d in the dealloc). I can set them, using standard array
> notation (i.e.
On 25/11/2009, at 11:20 AM, James Maxwell wrote:
> I have a couple of int* arrays I'm using as instance variables - they're
> declared in my @interface section, and inited using malloc when I init the
> object (and free()'d in the dealloc). I can set them, using standard array
> notation (i.e.
I have a couple of int* arrays I'm using as instance variables - they're
declared in my @interface section, and inited using malloc when I init the
object (and free()'d in the dealloc). I can set them, using standard array
notation (i.e., number[i] = 7) while I'm in a given method, but the value
10 matches
Mail list logo
