C / C++ / MFC

Nibu babu thomas wrote:

They are not obsolete

Nibu babu thomas wrote:

No. You are wrong. You had to explicitly declare a far pointer. You can also explicitly declare a near pointer using the near keyword but there was no need since that's the default

prasad_som wrote:

I wonder how you are able to use kewords 'far', 'near' ?

near int *pFarPtr = 0;<br />
far int *pFarPtr = 0;

Nibu babu thomas wrote:

You can try this in turbo

Nibu babu thomas wrote:

You won't see the difference in Win32 but in Win16 or DOS you may.

Nibu babu thomas wrote:

In MS VC you won't get any error as these keywords are #defined to expand to empty strings.

#define far // thats all

Nibu babu thomas wrote:

I used to use far frequently for directly accessing vdu.

For eg:

char far *pcVDUStart = 0xB8000000;

char *pcVDUStart = 0xB8000000;

prasad_som wrote:

Again, these are not keywords. they are just defines for backword compa. And it doesn't expand in to empy string. It is just define.

prasad_som wrote:

char *pcVDUStart = 0xB8000000;

prasad_som wrote:

No, empty string means "".

prasad_som wrote:

There is difference betn "expands to nothing" and "expands to "" ".

From MSDN...
 
Because the types NEAR and FAR are defined in WINDEF.H, they are
automatically handled by the include file, which redefines them as
<code>empty strings </code>for Win32. Thus, NEAR and FAR are ignored. 
If you do not include WINDEF.H, a convenient solution is to use 
the /D command-line option to replace the keywords by <code>empty 
strings</code>. For example:
/D_near=  /D_far= /D__near=  /D__far=

<br />
class Value<br />
{<br />
    public:<br />
         Value(double v);<br />
         double getValue() const;//returns val<br />
    private:<br />
        double val;<br />
};<br />
<br />
int main()<br />
{<br />
    Value v1(11.0);<br />
    int a = v1.getValue();//Warning should have been generated here.<br />
}<br />

Mithin wrote:

I am Visual Studio .net 2002

prasad_som wrote:

You need to use warning level 4.
...
But it is not recommended to this level. As, warnings though this level can be safely ignored.

PJ Arends wrote:

Not? I always set my projects to warning level 4 and try my best to eliminate all warnings.

PJ Arends wrote:

The version of STL that came with VC6 would overwhelm you with warnings, but later versions have fixed that.

prasad_som wrote:

But it is not recommended to this level. As, warnings though this level can be safely ignored.

COleDateTime dt(1971, 6, 12, 12, 0, 0);
CString s = dt.Format();
AfxMessageBox(s);