• State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 11 replies
  • Subscribers 21 subscribers
  • Views 2538 views
  • Users 0 members are here
2025 survey

We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.

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

Pointer Incrementing Warning

Yaswanth Narvaneni

Hi Friends,
I'm Currently working on C51v6.02 developed by Keil, I'm facing a problem with the compiler when I compile a similar code like this

main()
{
   char xdata *Data_Ptr = 0x0000; /* Pointer to the 0x000 location */

   while(some loop)
   *Data_Ptr++; /* Points to the next data location on the RAM-- here 0x0001 */
}
when I compile this it gives the following warning message, 
 .\FILENAME(LINENUMBER): warning C275: FILENAME: expression with possibly no effect

Is there any way to avoid this warning message?? Thank you,

With Regards,
Yaswanth

Proudly wasting time since 1981

Parents
  • 0 in reply to Vaclav Korecek

    Vaclav,
    I guess we need to do it this way.

    char xdata *Data_Ptr;
Data_Ptr = (char *) 0x0000; /* I guess this is the way it must be done */


    /* If done this way */
Data_Ptr = 0x0000;
/* you are not type casting it then in that case the compiler should/will give a warning -- Haven't tried it though. */

    And I haven't heard of
    Data_Ptr++; /* Will point to the next location */
*Data_Ptr++; /* But surely this will point to the next location */

    But why should it give a warning when both does the same stuff, and I guess
    *Data_Ptr++;
    is the correct way of incrementing it, is it not?

    Yaswanth
     Proudly wasting time since 1981

Reply
  • 0 in reply to Vaclav Korecek

    Vaclav,
    I guess we need to do it this way.

    char xdata *Data_Ptr;
Data_Ptr = (char *) 0x0000; /* I guess this is the way it must be done */


    /* If done this way */
Data_Ptr = 0x0000;
/* you are not type casting it then in that case the compiler should/will give a warning -- Haven't tried it though. */

    And I haven't heard of
    Data_Ptr++; /* Will point to the next location */
*Data_Ptr++; /* But surely this will point to the next location */

    But why should it give a warning when both does the same stuff, and I guess
    *Data_Ptr++;
    is the correct way of incrementing it, is it not?

    Yaswanth
     Proudly wasting time since 1981

Children
  • 0 in reply to Yaswanth Narvaneni

    Hmm... Not sure what "the correct way" means. But the rest of the world increments a pointer this way:

    Data_Ptr++;
    Of course, there are other ways:
    ++Data_Ptr;
or
Data_Ptr += 1;
or
Data_Ptr = Data_Ptr + 1;
    Or you can do it this way:
    *Data_Ptr++;
this expression is same as
*(Data_Ptr++);
or
Data_Ptr += 1, *Data_Ptr;
    But the dereferencing operator * is absolutely unnecessary because its result is not used. That's why the compiler gives the warning.
    Regards,
    - Mike

  • 0 in reply to Mik Kleshov

    Got you...
    Thanks Mike.

    -Yaswanth

     Proudly wasting time since 1981

  • 0 in reply to Yaswanth Narvaneni

    Yaswanth,

    " I guess we need to do it this way.

    char xdata *Data_Ptr;
    Data_Ptr = (char *) 0x0000; /* I guess this is the way it must be done */

    /* If done this way */
    Data_Ptr = 0x0000;
    /* you are not type casting it then in that case the compiler should/will give a warning -- Haven't tried it though. */
    "

    There isn't necessary to do casting because it is only initialized pointer to char in xdata memory at location 0.
    Compiler cannot be confused anyway I think. C51 Keil compiler don't generate warning in this case.

    Rest of your question:
    I agree with Mike's last and Andrew's second contribution.

    Vaclav