Search Results

Search found 1598 results on 64 pages for 'warnings'.

Page 6/64 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Core Data produces Analyzer warnings

    - by RickiG
    Hi I am doing the final touch ups on an app and I am getting rid of every compiler/analyzer warning. I have a bunch of Class methods that wrap my apps access to Core Data entities. This is "provoking" the analyzer. + (CDProductEntity*) newProductEntity { return (CDProductEntity*)[NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:@"CDProductEntity" inManagedObjectContext:[self context]]; } Which results in an Analyzer warning: Object with +0 retain counts returned to caller where a +1 (owning) retain count is expected In the method that calls the above Class Method I have this: CDProductEntity *newEntity = [self newProductEntity]; Which results in an Analyzer warning: Method returns an Objective-C object with a +1 retain count (owning reference) Explicitly releasing or autoreleasing a Core Data entity is usually very very bad, but is that what it is asking me to do here? First it tells me it has a +0 retain count and that is bad, then it tells me it has a +1 which is also bad. What can I do to ensure that I am either dealing with a Analyzer hiccup or that I release correctly? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Simulate memory warnings from the code, possible?

    - by krasnyk
    I know i can simulate a memory warning on the simulator by selecting 'Simulate Memory Warning' from the drop down menu of the iPhone Simulator. I can even make a hot key for that. But this is not what I'd like to achieve. I'd like to do that from the code by simply, lets say doing it every 5 seconds. Is that possible?

    Read the article

  • Objective C: Class Extensions and Protocol Conformation Warnings

    - by Ben Reeves
    I have a large class, which I have divided into several different class extension files for readability. @protocol MyProtocol @required -(void)required; @end @interface MyClass : NSObject <MyProtocol> @end @interface MyClass (RequiredExtension) -(void)required; @end Is there a better way to do this, without the compiler warning? warning: class 'MyClass' does not fully implement the 'MyProtocol' protocol

    Read the article

  • C++ - gcc-specific warnings

    - by HardCoder1986
    Hi! Got the following warning output when using GCC 4.5.0 & MinGW. Warning: .drectve `-aligncomm:___CTOR_LIST__,2 ' unrecognized Warning: .drectve `-aligncomm:___DTOR_LIST__,2' unrecognized What does it mean? I guess it's version-specific, because GCC 4.3.4 under cygwin didn't give that warning on the same project. If anyone had the following output (just curious that's that about), please advise me what to do.

    Read the article

  • Tiny C Compiler and Virus warnings...

    - by NoMoreZealots
    I wanted to try out the TCC and got the Win32 Binary zip file from the website. upon decompressing it I tried to compile the "hello_win.c" source from the example directory. As soon as the compiler tried to write to the disk McAfee Popped up a dialog box and identified a Trojan named "Generic.dx." Has anyone else experience this? Dropping a virus into a compiler would be a sneaky, but brilliant, delivery mechanizism. I just want to know if this is a legit threat.

    Read the article

  • when creating a release version I get the following warnings (vs 2008 settings)

    - by djones2010
    warning lnk4075:ignoring /editandcontinue due to /opt:icp specification error lnk2005: initp+misc_invarg already defined in libcmtd.lib(invarg.obj) i have many more errors lnk2005 all int he libcmt.lib file in the invarg.obj also lnk2098:: defaultlib conflicts with use of other libs. when i had it as debug it was all working i just started to make a release and everything went south. could I get some help how to do the release version the lib i was using is a composite lib which was working with my test app. however before i do the final release i wanted to test the release version of my lib but when i include that into my test app i got the aforementioned errors

    Read the article

  • MSBuild 4 fails to build VS2008 csproj due to 1 compiler warning

    - by David White
    We have a VS2008 CS DLL project targeting .NET 3.5. It builds successfully on our CI server when using MSBuild 3.5. When CI is upgraded to use MSBuild 4.0, the same project fails to build, due to 1 warning message: c:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v3.5\Microsoft.Common.targets(1418,9): warning MSB3283: Cannot find wrapper assembly for type library "ADODB". The warning does not occur with MSBuild 3.5, and I'm surprised that it results in Build FAILED. We do not have the project set to treat warnings as errors. All our other projects build successfully with either version of MSBuild.

    Read the article

  • Invalid receiver type 'NSUInteger'

    - by CJ
    I have a Core Data entity whose header file looks like this: @interface MyEntity : NSManagedObject { } @property (nonatomic, retain) NSNumber * index; @end And it's implementation file looks like this: @implementation MyEntity @dynamic index; @end Now, I have a piece of code that looks like this: NSArray* selectedObects = [myEntityArrayController selectedObjects]; NSUInteger theIndex = [[[selectedObects objectAtIndex:0] index] unsignedIntegerValue]; The 'myEntityArrayController' object is a NSArrayController which manages all entities of MyEntity. This code executes correctly, however XCode always gives the warning "Invalid receiver type 'NSUInteger'" for the last line of code. For some reason, XCode thinks that the index method returns a NSUInteger. I'm not sure why it thinks this, because 'objectAtIndex' returns an object of type 'id'. I've cleaned the project several times, and these warnings have hung around for a while. Any suggestions are appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What is the proper way to resolve Eclipse warning "isn't parameterized"?

    - by Morinar
    I'm trying to clean up some warnings in some old Java code (in Eclipse), and I'm unsure what the proper thing to do is in this case. The block looks more or less like this: Transferable content = getToolkit().getSystemClipboard().getContents( null ); java.util.List clipboardFileList = null; if( content.isDataFlavorSupported( DataFlavor.javaFileListFlavor ) ) { try { clipboardFileList = (java.util.List)content.getTransferData( DataFlavor.javaFileListFlavor); } /* Do other crap, etc. */ } The List generates a warning as it isn't parameterized, however, if I parameterize it with <File>, which I'm pretty sure is what it requires, it complains that it can't convert from Object to List<File>. I could merely suppress the unchecked warning for the function, but would prefer to avoid that if there is a "good" solution. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • What is the proper way to resolve this Eclipse warning?

    - by Morinar
    I'm trying to clean up some warnings in some old Java code (in Eclipse), and I'm unsure what the proper thing to do is in this case. The block looks more or less like this: java.util.List clipboardFileList = null; if( content.isDataFlavorSupported( DataFlavor.javaFileListFlavor ) ) { try { clipboardFileList = (java.util.List)content.getTransferData( DataFlavor.javaFileListFlavor); } /* Do other crap, etc. */ } The List generates a warning as it isn't parameterized, however, if I parameterize it with <File>, which I'm pretty sure is what it requires, it complains that it can't convert from Object to List<File>. I could merely suppress the unchecked warning for the function, but would prefer to avoid that if there is a "good" solution. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Default taglibs used within included JSPs for editing

    - by lostiniceland
    Hello everyone Within Eclipse's jsp-editor, as you all know, I get code-assistance for external taglibs once I defined them. In the project I am working on now a lot of jsps are just included and have no taglib definition in the top which gives me a lot of editor warnings. In the deployment this doesnt matter because the taglibs are defined in the head-jsp. Is there a way that I can define default taglibs within a project so the eclipse editor will give me code-assist even though I dont include the taglib in each file again?

    Read the article

  • Catch all exceptions in Scala 2.8 RC1

    - by Michel Krämer
    I have the following dummy Scala code in the file test.scala: class Transaction { def begin() {} def commit() {} def rollback() {} } object Test extends Application { def doSomething() {} val t = new Transaction() t.begin() try { doSomething() t.commit() } catch { case _ => t.rollback() } } If I compile this on Scala 2.8 RC1 with scalac -Xstrict-warnings test.scala I'll get the following warning: test.scala:16: warning: catch clause swallows everything: not advised. case _ => t.rollback() ^ one warning found So, if catch-all expressions are not advised, how am I supposed to implement such a pattern instead? And apart from that why are such expressions not advised anyhow?

    Read the article

  • Java generics SuppressWarnings("unchecked") mystery

    - by Johannes Ernst
    Why does code alternative(1) compile without warnings, and code alternative(2) produce an "unchecked cast" warning? Common for both: class Foo<T> { Foo( T [] arg ) { } } Alternative (1): class Bar<T> extends Foo<T> { protected static final Object [] EMPTY_ARRAY = {}; @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") Bar() { super( (T []) EMPTY_ARRAY ); } } Alternative (2): class Bar<T> extends Foo<T> { @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") Bar() { super( (T []) EMPTY_ARRAY ); } protected static final Object [] EMPTY_ARRAY = {}; } Alternative (2) produces: javac -Xlint:unchecked Foo.java Bar.java Bar.java:4: warning: [unchecked] unchecked cast super( (T []) EMPTY_ARRAY ); ^ required: T[] found: Object[] where T is a type-variable: T extends Object declared in class Bar 1 warning This is: java version "1.7.0_07" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_07-b10) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.3-b01, mixed mode)

    Read the article

  • C# Compiler should give warning but doesn't?

    - by Cristi Diaconescu
    Someone on my team tried fixing a 'variable not used' warning in an empty catch clause. try { ... } catch (Exception ex) { } - gives a warning about ex not being used. So far, so good. The fix was something like this: try { ... } catch (Exception ex) { string s = ex.Message; } Seeing this, I thought "Just great, so now the compiler will complain about s not being used." But it doesn't! There are no warnings on that piece of code and I can't figure out why. Any ideas? PS. I know catch-all clauses that mute exceptions are a bad thing, but that's a different topic. I also know the initial warning is better removed by doing something like this, that's not the point either. try { ... } catch (Exception) { } or try { ... } catch { }

    Read the article

  • What are the implications of having an "implicit declaration of function" warning in C?

    - by SiegeX
    As the question states, what exactly are the implications of having the 'implicit declaration of function' warning? We just cranked up the warning flags on gcc and found quite a few instances of these warnings and I'm curious what type of problems this may have caused prior to fixing them? Also, why is this a warning and not an error. How is gcc even able to successfully link this executable? As you can see in the example below, the executable functions as expected. Take the following two files for example: file1.c #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { funcA(); return 0; } file2.c #include <stdio.h> void funcA(void) { puts("hello world"); } Compile & Output $ gcc -Wall -Wextra -c file1.c file2.c file1.c: In function 'main': file1.c:3: warning: implicit declaration of function 'funcA' $ gcc -Wall -Wextra file1.o file2.o -o test.exe $ ./test.exe hello world

    Read the article

  • Implicit declaration when using a function before it is defined in C, why can't the compiler figure this out?

    - by rolls
    As the title says, I know what causes this error but I want to know why the compiler gives it in this circumstance. Eg : main.c void test(){ test1(); } void test1(){ ... } Would give an implicit declaration warning as the compiler would reach the call to test1() before it has read its declaration, I can see the obvious problems with this (not knowing return type etc), but why can't the compiler do a simple pass to get all function declarations, then compile the code removing these errors? It just seems so simple to do and I don't believe I've seen similar warnings in other languages. Does anyone know if there is a specific purpose for this warning in this situation that I am overlooking?

    Read the article

  • Error message when trying to insert method into touchesBegan

    - by Rob
    I am trying to create a new method within my TapDetectingImageView file and it's giving me a warning that it cannot find the method even though I have it declared in the .h file. The specific three warnings all point to the @end line in the .m file when I build it and they say: "Incomplete implementation of class 'TapDetectingImageView' ; 'Method definition for '-functionA:' not found" ; "Method definition for '-functionB:' not found" What am I missing? Am I not allowed to do this in a protocol file like TapDetectingImageView? In my .h file is: @interface TapDetectingImageView : UIImageView <AVAudioPlayerDelegate> { id <TapDetectingImageViewDelegate> delegate; } @property (nonatomic, assign) id <TapDetectingImageViewDelegate> delegate; -(void) functionA:(NSString*)aVariable; -(void) functionB:(NSString*)aVariable; @end In my .m file is: -(void)functionA:(NSString*)aVariable { // do stuff in this function with aVariable } -(void)functionB:(NSString*)aVariable { // do stuff in this function with aVariable }

    Read the article

  • Avoid incompatible pointer warning when dealing with double-indirection

    - by fnawothnig
    Assuming this program: #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> static void ring_pool_alloc(void **p, size_t n) { static unsigned char pool[256], i = 0; *p = &pool[i]; i += n; } int main(void) { char *str; ring_pool_alloc(&str, 7); strcpy(str, "foobar"); printf("%s\n", str); return 0; } ... is it possible to somehow avoid the GCC warning test.c:12: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘ring_pool_alloc’ from incompatible pointer type test.c:4: note: expected ‘void **’ but argument is of type ‘char **’ ... without casting to (void**) (or simply disabling the compatibility checks)? Because I would very much like to keep compatibility warnings regarding indirection-level...

    Read the article

  • Function defined but not used warning in C

    - by thetna
    I have a number of C source files(both .c and .h files). header files contains a number of functions. Out of those functions, only partially are used in a source .C file.Suppose a.h,b.h are header files and a.c and b.c are .c files. a.h is included in a.c. But only a number of functions those are in a. h are used and rest are not used. After compilation I find following warnings: function XXXX defined but not used. But those XXXX functions which are not used in a.c are used in b.c. So, i can't completely remove those functions too. So , i decided to make a separate file containing only those XXXX functions and included it wherever it is used.Doing this is creating multiple number of header files. Can anybody please suggest me to some effective way to solve this problem.

    Read the article

  • VS2010 (older) installer project - two or more objects have the same target location.

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    This installer project was created back in 2004 and upgraded ever since. There are two offending dll files, which produce a total of 4 errors. I have searched online for this warning message and did not find a permanent fix (I did manage to make it go away once until I have done something like a clean, or built in Release, and then in Debug). I also tried cleaning, and then refreshing the dependencies. The duplicated entries are still in there. I also did not find a good explanation for what this error means. Additional warnings are of this nature: Warning 36 The version of the .NET Framework launch condition '.NET Framework 4' does not match the selected .NET Framework bootstrapper package. Update the .NET Framework launch condition to match the version of the .NET Framework selected in the Prerequisites Dialog Box. So, where is this prerequisites box? I want to make both things agree on .Net 4.0, just having a hard time locating both of them.

    Read the article

  • JBoss: What does the warning EJBTHREE-1246 from the InterceptorRegistry mean?

    - by Simon Lehmann
    I am currently developing an EJB 3.0 based application on the JBoss AS 5.0.0.GA and just recently the following warning showed up in the server log: 09:50:19,735 WARN [InterceptorsFactory] EJBTHREE-1246: Do not use InterceptorsFactory with a ManagedObjectAdvisor, InterceptorRegistry should be used via the bean container 09:50:19,735 WARN [InterceptorsFactory] EJBTHREE-1246: Do not use InterceptorsFactory with a ManagedObjectAdvisor, InterceptorRegistry should be used via the bean container 09:50:19,735 WARN [InterceptorRegistry] applicable interceptors is non-existent for ... ... The warnings are generated as soon as an EJB (a stateless session bean) is injected into a backing bean of my JSF web-application. The beans do work without problems though, but I still would like to know where that warning comes from and what I can do to avoid it. I have already searched a bit around, but haven't found a good answer (some say, bean developers do not have to worry, but its a warning, so I'd like to have a better solution): http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=147292 http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180366 http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4140136 JBoss JIRA Issue about the warning (Not that helpful in my opinion) So has anyone an explanation what causes the warning (in terms of a bean developer, not application server developer) and what to do to avoid it? Update: I've just upgraded JBoss to 5.0.1.GA (Download, Release-Notes) but unfortunatly the warning still appears.

    Read the article

  • warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast

    - by FILIaS
    Im new in programming c with arrays and files. Im just trying to run the following code but i get warnings like that: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast Any help? It might be silly... but I cant find what's wrong. FILE *fp; FILE *cw; char filename_game[40],filename_words[40]; int main() { while(1) { /* Input filenames. */ printf("\n Enter the name of the file with the cryptwords array: \n"); gets(filename_game); printf("\n Give the name of the file with crypted words:\n"); gets(filename_words); /* Try to open the file with the game */ if (fp=fopen("crypt.txt","r")!=NULL) { printf("\n Successful opening %s \n",filename_game); fclose(fp); puts("\n Enter x to exit,any other to continue! \n "); if ( (getc(stdin))=='x') break; else continue; } else { fprintf(stderr,"ERROR!%s \n",filename_game); puts("\n Enter x to exit,any other to continue! \n"); if (getc(stdin)=='x') break; else continue; } /* Try to open the file with the names. */ if (cw=fopen("words.txt","r")!=NULL) { printf("\n Successful opening %s \n",filename_words); fclose(cw); puts("\n Enter x to exit,any other to continue \n "); if ( (getc(stdin))=='x') break; else continue; } else { fprintf(stderr,"ERROR!%s \n",filename_words); puts("\n Enter x to exit,any other to continue! \n"); if (getc(stdin)=='x') break; else continue; } } return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How best to deal with warning c4305 when type could change?

    - by identitycrisisuk
    I'm using both Ogre and NxOgre, which both have a Real typedef that is either float or double depending on a compiler flag. This has resulted in most of our compiler warnings now being: warning C4305: 'argument' : truncation from 'double' to 'Ogre::Real' When initialising variables with 0.1 for example. Normally I would use 0.1f but then if you change the compiler flag to double precision then you would get the reverse warning. I guess it's probably best to pick one and stick with it but I'd like to write these in a way that would work for either configuration if possible. One fix would be to use #pragma warning (disable : 4305) in files where it occurs, I don't know if there are any other more complex problems that can be hidden by not having this warning. I understand I would push and pop these in header files too so that they don't end up spreading across code. Another is to create some macro based on the accuracy compiler flag like: #if OGRE_DOUBLE_PRECISION #define INIT_REAL(x) (x) #else #define INIT_REAL(x) static_cast<float>( x ) #endif which would require changing all the variable initialisation done so far but at least it would be future proof. Any preferences or something I haven't thought of?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >