home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!network.ucsd.edu!qualcom.qualcomm.com!qualcom.qualcomm.com!sdorner
- From: sdorner@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Steve Dorner)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
- Subject: Re: incrementation differences/THINK C 4.0 vs. 5.0
- Message-ID: <1992Aug28.130710.18938@qualcomm.com>
- Date: 28 Aug 92 13:07:10 GMT
- References: <D2150035.c21d0r@outpost.SF-Bay.org> <1992Aug27.182157.16567@qualcomm.com> <38188@unix.SRI.COM>
- Sender: news@qualcomm.com
- Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
- Lines: 28
- Nntp-Posting-Host: qualcom.qualcomm.com
-
- mxmora@unix.SRI.COM (Matt Mora) writes:
- >Steve Dorner writes:
- >> a=b=c d=e;
- >I entered that line into think c and it said "syntax error" which is
- > a=b=c
- > d=e;
- >then it selects the first line and say's "Missing ";" ". It knows where
- >the missing ";" should go.
-
- It does *not* know where the missing ";" should go. It knows where
- something is missing. An '=' would be a perfectly good choice, too.
-
- >if (a=b) {
- >When the programmer really meant a==b. Should there be a option to check
- >if statements?
-
- "When the programmer really meant a==b" is the trick. I write if
- statements like your example all the time, and I mean them.
-
- I can't use the MPW C compiler's full warnings, because all it does is
- whine constantly about this particular idiom. What I'm really looking
- for is lost in reams of dreck. If you're going to add such
- warnings to a C compiler, you have to make them individually
- selectable; having an "Anal Retentive" checkbox just doesn't cut it.
- Finer control is necessary.
- --
- Steve Dorner, Qualcomm, Inc.
- Yes, I'm still working on Eudora and it's still free.
-