[Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gerhard Gappmeier wrote:
> I see. This works a little bit different than I expected.
>   void method(int _U_)
>   {
>   }
> just becomes
>   void method(int )
>   {
>   }
> I'm not sure if every compiler accepts that or also outputs a warning if the 
> parameter name is missing.

In fact it should be used like:

void method(int foo _U_)

which should become

void method(int foo __attribute__((unused)))

I'm not sure if _U_ is implemented for anything other than GCC, though. 
 What compiler are you using?