OpenEuphoria

Re: request for change

• Posted by Juergen Luethje <j.lue at gmx?d?> Jan 08, 2008
• 623 views

Bernie Ryan wrote:

> Matt Lewis wrote:
> > 
> > Bernie Ryan wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > with/without warning should be reversed.
> > > 
> > > The major use of 'with warning' is to look for unused variables/constants
> > > when writing a program.
> > > 
> > > It seems that everyone that posts a program in the archives places
> > > 'without warning' at the top of their final program.
> > > 
> > > That does not make sense to me; Why isn't 'without warning' the default ?
> > 
> > Because the warnings are there for a reason.  Some are more useful than
> > others.  It's reasonable for released code to have "without warning" 
> > at the top.  It's presumably been tested by the author.  One would hope
> > that he'd fixed any dangerous warnings before releasing his code.
> > 
> > The defaults are correct.
> > 
> 
> Matt:
> 
>    'without warning' is used by lazy programmers that don't
>    want to be bothered with cleaning up their programs by
>    removing unused variables.

So you want to make this the default setting in order to support their
lazyness?? Sorry, that's above me.

Also, 'without warning' is used by other kinds of programmers as well.
Those who appreciate warnings during developement time, and just before
releasing the code, they switch warnings off for speed gain. I absolutely agree
with Matt, that it's obvious that the default should be to have
warnings on.

Regards,
   Juergen

-- 
There are two ways of constructing a software design:
One way is to make it so simple that there are /obviously/ no deficiencies
and the other is to make it so complicated that there are no /obvious/
deficiencies.         [C.A.R. Hoare (1987), The Emperor's Old Clothes]