Warning with the use of tolower

[asbisht]

Greetings to everyone.

#include<iostream>

main( void )
{
unsigned char value = 'A';
std::cout << tolower(value);
return 0;
}

if I compile this using Solaris CC with +w option, then it gives me the
following warning:

Warning: Could not find source for std::tolower(int).

Please tell me why the above warning is coming and the idea to avoid
it.
Regards,
-Ajay

[James Daughtry]

You need to include <cctype> to use the single argument definition of
tolower. And don't forget to qualify it with std. Standard C++ also
disallows implicit int for function definitions:

#include<cctype>
#include<iostream>

int main( void )
{
unsigned char value = 'A';
std::cout << std::tolower(value);
return 0;
}

[asbisht]

Hi James,

I had tried that before but it couldn't remove that warning. Moreover,
I have also tried typecasting it as int (*)(int) but that also didn't
work. I'm attaching the transcript with your suggestion as follows:

----
$/home/ajay/SUNWspro/WS6U2/bin/CC +w 1.cxx
"1.cxx", line 6: Warning: Could not find source for std::tolower(int).
----

Regards,
-Ajay

[Larry I Smith]

as*****@gmail.com wrote:

Greetings to everyone.

#include<iostream>

main( void )
{
unsigned char value = 'A';
std::cout << tolower(value);
return 0;
}

if I compile this using Solaris CC with +w option, then it gives me the
following warning:

Warning: Could not find source for std::tolower(int).

Please tell me why the above warning is coming and the idea to avoid
it.
Regards,
-Ajay

The C++ versions of tolower, toupper, isalnum, etc
are in <locale>. These versions work with more
charsets than just ASCII.

#include <iostream>
#include <locale>

int main()
{
unsigned char value = 'A';
char lower = std::tolower(value);
std::cout << lower << std::endl;
return 0;
}

Regards,
Larry

--
Anti-spam address, change each 'X' to '.' to reply directly.

[Pete Becker]

Larry I Smith wrote:

The C++ versions of tolower, toupper, isalnum, etc
are in <locale>. These versions work with more
charsets than just ASCII.

The C versions work with more charsets than just ASCII as well. Read
about setlocale.

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Larry I Smith]

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

The C++ versions of tolower, toupper, isalnum, etc
are in <locale>. These versions work with more
charsets than just ASCII.

The C versions work with more charsets than just ASCII as well. Read
about setlocale.

Did I say they didn't? (:

When using C++, we use the Std C++ features wherever possible.

e.g use

#include <locale>

[Pete Becker]

Larry I Smith wrote:

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

The C++ versions of tolower, toupper, isalnum, etc
are in <locale>. These versions work with more
charsets than just ASCII.

The C versions work with more charsets than just ASCII as well. Read
about setlocale.

Did I say they didn't? (:

You obviously implied it.

When using C++, we use the Std C++ features wherever possible.

When using C++ we use the most appropriate coding technique, whether
it's labeled C, preprocessor, or whatever. Std C++ features aren't
autmoatically the best way to do something.

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Larry I Smith]

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

The C++ versions of tolower, toupper, isalnum, etc
are in <locale>. These versions work with more
charsets than just ASCII.
The C versions work with more charsets than just ASCII as well. Read
about setlocale.
Did I say they didn't? (:

You obviously implied it.

I sure didn't mean to...

When using C++, we use the Std C++ features wherever possible.

When using C++ we use the most appropriate coding technique, whether
it's labeled C, preprocessor, or whatever. Std C++ features aren't
autmoatically the best way to do something.

Well, OK. To each his own. (:

Larry

--
Anti-spam address, change each 'X' to '.' to reply directly.

[Pete Becker]

Larry I Smith wrote:

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

When using C++, we use the Std C++ features wherever possible.

When using C++ we use the most appropriate coding technique, whether
it's labeled C, preprocessor, or whatever. Std C++ features aren't
autmoatically the best way to do something.

Well, OK. To each his own. (:

Being supercilious is not the same as being right.

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Larry I Smith]

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

Pete Becker wrote:

Larry I Smith wrote:

When using C++, we use the Std C++ features wherever possible.
When using C++ we use the most appropriate coding technique, whether
it's labeled C, preprocessor, or whatever. Std C++ features aren't
autmoatically the best way to do something.

Well, OK. To each his own. (:

Being supercilious is not the same as being right.

It's not a matter of "being right", or wrong. It's
just a matter of choice. Both versions of tolower()
work just fine.

We use the Std C++ features primarily. That's just
the choice made by our corporate Engineering Council
and defined in our Coding Standards.

I really didn't mean to upset anyone over the simple
choice of using std::tolower() versus ::tolower().

Regards,
Larry

--
Anti-spam address, change each 'X' to '.' to reply directly.