RaptorUK: If you don't want to post all the code, so that the error can be reproduced, please code something that you can post in full that will reproduce the same error.
Pity you didn't answer this question . . . make the function a void as it doesn't need to return anything, remove the return(0) recompile, what happens ?
RaptorUK: Pity you didn't answer this question . . . make the function a void as it doesn't need to return anything, remove the return(0) recompile, what happens ?
Yes that also sorts it. BUT why? I mean what if we say the function was an int and we needed the value. Why is it that changing part of the objects solves it wether the function is int or not. Even start, init and deinit are ints and they return(0) so that isnt the issue.
Yes that also sorts it. BUT why? I mean what if we say the function was an int and we needed the value. Why is it that changing part of the objects solves it wether the function is int or not. Even start, init and deinit are ints and they return(0) so that isnt the issue.
return(0) is returning an int, the int is zero . . . a void doesn't return a value, if you want or return from a void function early you use return;
But it can handle that large a function . . . as I explained, change the function type and there is no compilation error for the same size of function . .
Allow the use of cookies to log in to the MQL5.com website.
Please enable the necessary setting in your browser, otherwise you will not be able to log in.
You are signed in. Two-factor authentication has been disabled. Set it up again and scan a new QR code, or continue with two-factor authentication disabled.
If you don't want to post all the code, so that the error can be reproduced, please code something that you can post in full that will reproduce the same error.
See my post just before this.
11/13/2013 03:25 PM 37,911 Ind_error_tester_Neutralized.mq4
You attached
11/13/2013 03:25 PM 37,911 Ind_error_tester_Neutralized.mq4
Yes sorry. Ive attached again.
. . . why is your function type int ?
Pity you didn't answer this question . . . make the function a void as it doesn't need to return anything, remove the return(0) recompile, what happens ?
Yes that also sorts it. BUT why? I mean what if we say the function was an int and we needed the value. Why is it that changing part of the objects solves it wether the function is int or not. Even start, init and deinit are ints and they return(0) so that isnt the issue.
Apparently it can't handle that large of a function.
Yes that also sorts it. BUT why? I mean what if we say the function was an int and we needed the value. Why is it that changing part of the objects solves it wether the function is int or not. Even start, init and deinit are ints and they return(0) so that isnt the issue.
whroeder getting what im talking about.