On Wednesday 18 April 2007 20:39, Hans Leidekker wrote:
+static int resolver_initialised;
Shouldn't that be
static int resolver_initilised = 0;
here? I thought that in C, ints aren't initialized to 0 automatically.
+/* call res_init() just once because of a bug in Mac OSX 10.4 */ +static void initialise_resolver( void ) +{
- if (!resolver_initialised)
- {
res_init();
resolver_initialised = 1;
- }
+}
Cheers, Kai
On 19/04/07, Kai Blin kai.blin@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 18 April 2007 20:39, Hans Leidekker wrote:
+static int resolver_initialised;
Shouldn't that be
static int resolver_initilised = 0;
here? I thought that in C, ints aren't initialized to 0 automatically.
Afaik static variables are.
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 07:49 +0200, Kai Blin wrote:
On Wednesday 18 April 2007 20:39, Hans Leidekker wrote:
+static int resolver_initialised;
Shouldn't that be
static int resolver_initilised = 0;
here? I thought that in C, ints aren't initialized to 0 automatically.
Actually I think in this case they would be. Most compilers do this by default IIRC (if you'd like to see for yourself, try the attached test.) Still, I think it would be prudent to put the 0 in there anyway, sine I don't think there's a standard that says compilers have to do this so there could potentially be portability problems.
HTH, James
James Liggett jrliggett@cox.net writes:
Actually I think in this case they would be. Most compilers do this by default IIRC (if you'd like to see for yourself, try the attached test.) Still, I think it would be prudent to put the 0 in there anyway, sine I don't think there's a standard that says compilers have to do this so there could potentially be portability problems.
There are no potential problems at all, statics are _always_ initialized to 0 in C.
On Thursday 19 April 2007 23:34, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
James Liggett jrliggett@cox.net writes:
Actually I think in this case they would be. Most compilers do this by default IIRC (if you'd like to see for yourself, try the attached test.) Still, I think it would be prudent to put the 0 in there anyway, sine I don't think there's a standard that says compilers have to do this so there could potentially be portability problems.
There are no potential problems at all, statics are _always_ initialized to 0 in C.
And another new thing learned about C. Thanks for the explanations.
Kai