RE: Short Circuit message
- Posted by gertie at ad-tek.net
Jul 29, 2001
On 29 Jul 2001, at 20:26, Bernie Ryan wrote:
>
>
> Robert Craig wrote:
> >
> > Warnings are meant to flag things that,
> > while correct, may deserve some attention.
> >
>
> There are many times when it is desirable to write short circuit
> routines for speed or sometimes they are unavoidable.
>
> I can write CORRECT code that runs with NO ERRORS and when the
> program completes running it pops up your STUPID short-circuit
> message.
>
> Why is it necessary for the user to have to edit his program to
> prevent this popup window from displaying.
> It would be fine if this was a compiler but its and interpter
> and it should not be displaying that message.
>
> If the code is correct it should run without warnings or errors
> It's not up to the interpter to second guess some users logic.
I know no one asked me, but my opinion on interpreters follows:
They can and should be the smartest thing since DeepBlue at what they do.
I don't care *how* they do it, whether by directly "running" the source code or
by generating a p-file, but they *can* be the experts at optimization. They
*should* be able to run thru a list of exceptions in generating p-code, and
*should* be able even to handle some keyword spelling mistakes, as well as
reading an ini file so people in other countries could plug in non-english
keywords. Don't get me wrong, i figure Eu is great, but it doesn't really break
out of the ruts all the computer languages are in. We are still moderating our
processes to get a machine to do what we want, when it's way past time for
the machine to understand *us*. It should be easy to drop into an exception
list: "allow all short circuits".
Kat
-
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
