Skydiver, on 16 May 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

That's all of them.

As an aside, I actually took most of this code right from: http://msdn.microsof...1(v=vs.85).aspx

All the socket stuff is basically copy pasted with different values. And if I copy paste that whole document it compiles fine.

I keep trying this in codeblocks too and it basically tells me the same thing.

C:\Users\Charles\github\Programming\C++\Socket Wrapper\Winsock 2.0\Winsock2Wrapper\WS2Wrap.h|43|error: abstract declarator '<anonymous class>' used as declaration|

Not sure how class WS2Wrap is anonymous.

And I fixed my own problem. I would really like to know what was wrong with WS2Wrap, but apparently it doesn't like it. I had to change my class name to Winsock2Wrapper.

jimblumberg, on 16 May 2013 - 06:37 AM, said:

At the time, Visual Studio was the only IDE that had a definition for TR1. C++11 did not exist yet either. The TR1 warnings were simply an example from awhile ago. Now however, C++11 is TR1 so you're right, there's no reason anymore to use TR1.

I use Visual Studio 2012 Ultimate, the example from TR1 was from 2010.

Me personally, the safe version warnings can be ignored. If you know you don't want the safe warnings well then that's your choice. The Win32 API does this a lot. I could turn them off, I don't particularly want to, because sometimes I do mean to use safe and forget to. I don't like turning any warnings off and I like to have the verbose and strict warning settings.

Skydiver, on 16 May 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

If you expect the warning to be there, such as the tr1 warnings in visual studio, then it's normal. The tr1 warnings as an example basically just say 'This is new.'

sepp2k, on 16 May 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

I consider Any code that produces warning to not be compiled(unless those warnings are normal), that's also why I said shouldn't within the context of it does but really shouldn't.

I guess you can say I'm a fan of strict type enforcement.

Why would radius be passed to any other function? As it stands right now you are just passing zero.

Also, based on your above code this shouldn't compile. You pass 0 to functions that require a pointer to a float variable. You can pass 0 for the function that requires a straight float variable, but only for that one argument. As to parameter lists.

Input Radius takes a pointer to a float. IE

Float *myExample;

Volume takes a float variable and a pointer. IE

Float *myExample;
Float vol;

I think you can get the last one.

Also, int main not float main.