Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| Testing strategy for compiler kuangpma@gmail.com (kuangpma) (2010-06-16) |
| Re: Testing strategy for compiler ott@mirix.org (Matthias-Christian Ott) (2010-06-18) |
| Re: Testing strategy for compiler gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2010-06-18) |
| Re: Testing strategy for compiler gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2010-06-19) |
| Re: Testing strategy for compiler gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2010-06-21) |
| Re: Pascal design, was Testing strategy for compiler marcov@turtle.stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2010-06-22) |
| Re: Pascal design, was Testing strategy for compiler gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2010-06-25) |
| From: | Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:17:52 +0000 (UTC) |
| Organization: | Stack Usenet News Service |
| References: | 10-06-037 10-06-044 10-06-050 10-06-054 10-06-061 |
| Keywords: | design, Pascal |
| Posted-Date: | 23 Jun 2010 09:55:55 EDT |
On 2010-06-21, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> wrote:
> Pascal's FOR loop is required to terminate in all cases - deliberately
> causing an infinite loop is illegal. The compiler is required to
> check that step <> zero on entry to the loop and it is illegal to
> modify any of the loop control values (index, finish, step) from
> within the body of the loop.
(isn't the loopvar also required to be a ordinal local var? Or is that
Borland dialects only? Anyway it is a rule that also excludes a lot of
dodgy use cases)
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.