×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
I have a field called OFFSET, in a file, that's defined as packed(5,0).
And in an ADDT0100-type structure for a call to QtmmSendMail, in one of
the programs that uses this file, I also have a field called OFFSET,
defined as a 4-byte binary.
Remarkably, the thing compiles (and has, with this selfsame seeming name
collision, for over a year).
Neither of the two fields gets accessed directly. Is that why the
compiler isn't seeing the name collision?
I'm assuming that the reason a potentially polluted "offset to next
address structure" field isn't blowing up QtmmSendMail is that there's
never a "next address structure" to offset to.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
