> From: wmperry(a)aventail.com (William M. Perry) > Date: 04 Jun 1998 08:10:56 -0500 > Sender: owner-xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org > > Could the definition of CONST somehow be different between the .h and .c > files? Some .h file included after glyphs.h doing the definition, or > redoing it, etc? Give the man the prize! I already had guessed this to be the case, but had not had time to look. Now I have and that is it. In the case of glyphs.h, CONST is defined as "const" but by the time the read_bitmap_data_from_file is reached in the main code, it has been re-defined as "". I believe this is being done by zconf.h called from zlib.h. It does not redefine CONST, but defines const to nothing. I can "fix" the problem so that the compiler only gives a warning by adding #define const const after the #include <png.h> I still get the warning: cc: Warning: glyphs-x.c, line 69: The redefinition of the macro "const" conflicts with a current definition because the replacement lists differ. The redefinition is now in effect. #define const const --------------^ Now I must wonder why gcc does not have a problem with the inconsistency in the "const". Looks to me like it should complain, too.