OpenEuphoria

2. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by fizzpopsoft Feb 12, 2013
• 1377 views

eui -STRICT also does not warn about the unreferenced procedure or function, it does warn about the unused parm in test2

4. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Feb 12, 2013
• 1379 views

It's not a bug because interpreted Euphoria was not designed to give warnings about un-referenced routines. You might like to create a ticket as nominate it as an enhancement request. If you do, I'd suggest that only private routines be involved and then only warned about when the -STRICT option is used.

The bind process has options to list routines that are not referenced.

While developing a program or module, it is very common to have routines that are not used yet. That is why I would suggest that the -STRICT option be used to trigger the warnings.

6. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by fizzpopsoft Feb 12, 2013
• 1358 views

OK,
I remember seeing the warnings about unused routines in an earlier Euphoria version;
this may have been the bind as you say, but yes it seems a enhancement request
where the warning will be produced with eui -STRICT is the way forward.
Perhaps an appropriate doc update too, once the enhancement has been incorporated.
I'll create that request.
I found the issue the "hard way" BTW with a 6000 line source program that is still not working ;)

Thanks Gents,
Alan

8. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by EUWX Feb 12, 2013
• 1361 views

It is NOT a bug.
At best, one can issue a warning during compilation, or at the beginning of interpretation.

10. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by petelomax Feb 13, 2013
• 1289 views

Oh yes it is!

Nevermind, I just wanted to say that (in the original post)

    sprintf("%d",{public2}) 

will, btw, achieve diddly squat. It will create a string (such as "9") and then just throw it away, without displaying it or anything.

Pete

12. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Feb 13, 2013
• 1284 views

It's not a bug because Euphoria was not designed to be helpful. 

At one point in 4.0 development, I think we had warnings for unused routines turned on. Nearly every program run ended with tons of such warnings. They were mostly library routines that you never used in your current program. That's the opposite of helpful. It's difficult to get the warning level tweaked correctly, and use of routine_id makes it even harder, of course.

I think the routine_id detection is quite a bit better now, so binding and getting the list might be useful. I'll also add that the coverage capabilities allow you to include or exclude files from coverage.

I recall unused parameters causing similar problems. Especially in a GUI app where your event handlers have a standard set of parameters, all of which rarely need to be used.

Matt

14. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Feb 13, 2013
• 1254 views

Yep ...

It's not a bug because Euphoria was not designed to be helpful. 

1. What is helpful for one may be not so to another.
2. There are many things that could have been added to the language that would be seen as helpful to some so does that also imply that the omission of these are all bugs? For example, parse-time enforcement of datatype usage.
3. I'm pretty sure that as Euphoria is evolving, it is becoming more helpful. There are things in place now, which were never in Rob's edition of the language, that can be argued are helpful additions. This particular suggested enhancement would be helpful to some and that is why I recommend that it be added as a request for a future edition of the language.

-- Example of Parse-Time Datatyping. 
procedure Sample(integer x) 
   -- do something with 'x' 
end procedure 
Sample("ABC")  -- Fails at run time rather than at parse-time. 

It would not anger me, and I don't know where you got that idea from, but anyhow ... I can imagine that while developing an application or module, that during the repeated testing of it, messages that constantly reminded me that I haven't yet used certain routines would get tiresome and/or possibly mess up the intended console output of the program. However, towards the end of development or at specific cadence points in the development cycle, using the -STRICT command line option to double check for silly mistakes, would be a good idea, IMO.

16. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Feb 13, 2013
• 1274 views

    sprintf("%d",{public2}) 

I preferred using a tilde to mark it, to avoid having this happen by accident and also as a visual hook to make it more obvious that there was a return value that would be ignored.

18. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Feb 13, 2013
• 1253 views

    sprintf("%d",{public2}) 

Until someone used two libraries that both declared VOID. Then you have to deal with namespace headaches.

20. Re: Bug in 4.0.5? EUI, no warning for unused procedures/functions

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Feb 14, 2013
• 1214 views

There is actually a lot of configurability (beyond -strict) with the 4.0 warning system. I don't really use it much, but such a beast as we've been discussing in this thread would probably be added as a new with warning option.

We have not_used, but that appears to apply only to variables. Routines are a bit more difficult, of course, though if that option is turned on, we could run through the same process we use for binding. The translator is a lot more complex and does a more thorough job of removing routines, though I don't believe it gives a list of things it deletes.

Matt