Related articles |
---|
Non-declared Variables acampbellb@hotmail.com (Avatar) (2006-10-16) |
Re: Non-declared Variables int2k@gmx.net (Wolfram Fenske) (2006-10-17) |
Re: Non-declared Variables gnorik@gmail.com (2006-10-24) |
Re: Non-declared Variables Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2006-10-26) |
Re: Non-declared Variables pjb@informatimago.com (Pascal Bourguignon) (2006-10-28) |
Re: Non-declared Variables ArarghMail610@Arargh.com (2006-10-28) |
Re: Non-declared Variables genew@ocis.net (Gene Wirchenko) (2007-01-28) |
From: | ArarghMail610@Arargh.com |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 28 Oct 2006 01:25:11 -0400 |
Organization: | Ripco Communications Inc. |
References: | 06-10-064 06-10-098 06-10-109 |
Keywords: | design, comment |
Posted-Date: | 28 Oct 2006 01:25:11 EDT |
On 26 Oct 2006 00:28:58 -0400, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com>
wrote:
>gnorik@gmail.com wrote:
>> I don't think that it is a good idea when language definition allows
>> you to use variables without declaration.
>> First of all, it leads to bugs which is rather hard to find.
>
>I would expect the compiler to issue a message for this, unless
>undeclared variables are the norm for this language, as in Rexx. PL/I,
>for example, has language-specified defaults and default rules, but all
>compilers I know of also warn.
MS Basic 16-bit compilers for the most part, didn't.
Come to think of it, I don't think that the 32-bit ones do either.
The exception to that is that some support an "OPTION EXPLICIT" which
causes an error for undeclared variables, when used.
--
ArarghMail610 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html
[BASIC never required declarations, even for arrays. -John]
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.