• State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 71 replies
  • Subscribers 22 subscribers
  • Views 6870 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
How was your experience today?
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

problem in string display

rak men

#include<reg51.h>
#include<string.h>
#include<stdio.h>
#define lcd_data P1
sbit rs=P2^0;
sbit rw=P2^1;
sbit en=P2^2;
unsigned char n[5]="hello";
unsigned char m[]="welcome rakesh";
void cmd_lcd(unsigned char);
void write_lcd(char);
void delay(unsigned int);
void lcd_int()
{ cmd_lcd(0x38); cmd_lcd(0x0c); cmd_lcd(0x01); cmd_lcd(0x80);
} void cmd_lcd(unsigned char x)
{ x=lcd_data;
rs=0;
rw=0;
en=1;
delay(50);
en=0;
}

void write_lcd(char s)
{

s=lcd_data;
rs=1;
rw=0;
en=1;
delay(500);
en=0;
} void delay(unsigned int temp)
{ unsigned int i,j;
for(i=0;i<255;i++);
for(j=0;j<temp;j++);
}

void main()
{ void lcd_int(); void write_lcd(n); void delay(500); void cmd_lcd(0x01); void delay(100); void write_lcd(m); void delay(100);
}

this code shows following error:
Build target 'Target 1'
compiling lcdc04.c...
LCDC04.C(50): error C161: 'n': formal parameter ignored
Target not created

please help me in clearing this...

Parents
  • 0 in reply to ImPer Westermark

    But the line he discussed wasn't a function call - so his description of calling the function with wrong data just couldn't be correct

    But would you not say that it was obviously an attempt to call a function? And once the void was corrected (which, lets not forget, Jameel also mentioned), the incorrect parameter type would also need correcting.

    You yourself provided a number of faults you noticed, so I do wonder. Did you enter the code, compile, take a note of the reported error, fix it, re-compile and repeat until there were no more errors or did you do a quick scan of the code to see problems by eye?

    Surely the latter.

    Is it not likely that Jameel did the same? Maybe, just maybe, his eye is not yet as well tuned to seeing problems in badly/incorrectly formatted code as you. But a little credit for seeing one genuine fault would be way more constructive than the negatives he received.

Reply
  • 0 in reply to ImPer Westermark

    But the line he discussed wasn't a function call - so his description of calling the function with wrong data just couldn't be correct

    But would you not say that it was obviously an attempt to call a function? And once the void was corrected (which, lets not forget, Jameel also mentioned), the incorrect parameter type would also need correcting.

    You yourself provided a number of faults you noticed, so I do wonder. Did you enter the code, compile, take a note of the reported error, fix it, re-compile and repeat until there were no more errors or did you do a quick scan of the code to see problems by eye?

    Surely the latter.

    Is it not likely that Jameel did the same? Maybe, just maybe, his eye is not yet as well tuned to seeing problems in badly/incorrectly formatted code as you. But a little credit for seeing one genuine fault would be way more constructive than the negatives he received.

Children