Re: Non-declared Variables
28 Oct 2006 01:25:11 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Non-declared Variables (Avatar) (2006-10-16)
Re: Non-declared Variables (Wolfram Fenske) (2006-10-17)
Re: Non-declared Variables (2006-10-24)
Re: Non-declared Variables (Peter Flass) (2006-10-26)
Re: Non-declared Variables (Pascal Bourguignon) (2006-10-28)
Re: Non-declared Variables (2006-10-28)
Re: Non-declared Variables (Gene Wirchenko) (2007-01-28)
| List of all articles for this month |

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 <>

> 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 ->]
BCET Basic Compiler Page:
[BASIC never required declarations, even for arrays. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.