Hi,

nobu.nokada / softhome.net wrote:
>>>>>What about ((void)0) ?
>>>>
>>>>	Again - gcc warns about 'code has no effect'...

You were right here. ((void)0) is absolutely perfect. GCC doesn't say a 
word. Maybe I confused you - so once again: the right patch is to write 
((void)0) where we need no code.

>>>I've used this (void)0 trick many times, we have to replace
>>>them all to make gcc 3.2.2 quiet?
>>>Anyhow, what it defines assert() in <assert.h> if NDEBUG?
>>
>>	You're right - as usually :))
> 
> 
> Possibly, gcc 3.2.2 always complains about assert() if NDEBUG?

The same here. Gcc 3.2.2 is OK with ((void)0).

	Michal