From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5c8024b730bb1bfb X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-05 13:00:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!news From: cjsonnack@mmm.com (Programmer Dude) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Compiler error: 'Expect procedure name in procedure call' Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 14:51:34 -0600 Organization: 3M Company Message-ID: <3DC82F56.A723BACA@mmm.com> References: <445cd6bf.0211040705.3b638858@posting.google.com> <445cd6bf.0211041157.1537dfd5@posting.google.com> <3DC6DCC4.60301@worldnet.att.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD 3M/NCP 4.5 (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30400 Date: 2002-11-05T14:51:34-06:00 List-Id: Jim Rogers wrote: > You are actually calling C functions. It is still a bad idea to > ignore a return value. The return value is your only indication of an > error from a C function. Ignoring errors is a BAD idea. But what about C functions in the str* family? They often just return their first argument (that is, not an error code). -- |_ CJSonnack _____________| How's my programming? | |_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL | |_____________________________________________|_______________________| Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.