From: Nick Ambrose (nick_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-10-28 16:03:11
Ed Brey wrote:
> Nick Ambrose wrote:
> > Duh ! Sorry, ignore my ranting. I was of course referring to the C4786 error.
> > Frankly, this 4503 one sounds scary since it does not (as far as i can see) refer to
> > the debug info.
> > However, I have never seen 4503. ever. I can't imagine that the limit is 255 here -
> > since I have seen 4786 for which the limit is 255.
> The following is the help on C4503 (my recollection of 255 was a
> little off):
> 'identifier' : decorated name length exceeded, name was truncated
> The decorated name was longer than the maximum the compiler allows
> (247), and was truncated. To avoid this warning and the truncation,
> reduce the number of arguments or name length of identifiers used.
Yeouch. I guess this is (kinda) OK if it really means decoration (which is different than
mangling here) and the decorated name is then mangled.
I am not sure that is the case though. How many arguments are being passed to the function
in question ?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk