OpenEuphoria

Re: Short-circuit warning

• Posted by CChris <christian.cuvier at agricul?ure.gou?.fr> May 20, 2008
• 633 views

Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> 
> Jason Gade wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > I think it was a valid warning when short-circuiting was new to Euphoria. I
> > guess the question is whether short-circuiting is expected behavior by
> > people
> > new or relatively new to programming?
> > 
> > Personally, I say do away with it and make it very clear in the docs that
> > that
> > is how things work.
> > 
> 
> Short circuiting should be explained in the manual and it should be taught in
> any elementary programming course. I do not think that Euphoria should
> consider
> everyone a newbie or a dummy. It's a programming language. There are some
> things
> you should know when programming. Short circuiting is one of those, IMHO. I've
> not seen any language (I'm sure that it may exist) that has given a warning
> about short circuiting. That's almost as bad as:
> 
> Warning: if statement may branch if it's condition is true
> 
> Um, we know that  To me the short-circuit warnings
> galore just mask a real warning. Makes me want to turn off warnings, but I
> know that would be bad.
> 

Which is what I routinely do, and not only because of this particular warning.
"local variable is not used" occur a lot when you create GUI apps, and these
useless warnings just clutter the output. I also heard that it harms CGI
programs, but didn't play with this.

Pete Lomax was recommending a with warning= directive to selectively turn
warnings on or off. This would be harmless in terms of performance, and might
make it workable, or even useful, to turn warnings on.

CChris

> --
> Jeremy Cowgar
> <a href="http://jeremy.cowgar.com">http://jeremy.cowgar.com</a>