Hi,
FALSE AND ERROR is FALSE ? That cannot be !
I disagree.
FALSE AND ... whatever is FALSE since whatever is never evaluated.
FALSE AND ERROR has to be ERROR !!!
Definitely not.
The first condition (a<>0) is NOT met and so, in any other programming
language I use, the second condit
Am 19.09.17 um 21:27 schrieb Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users
As a=0 at line 30, there is an "ERROR IN EXPRESSION" in the "if" condition
And there is no way to put this expression to "true" or "false" as there is a
big BIG "ERROR" !!!
> Hi all,
>
> Just a rant about the SBasic AND operator.
>
> Su
That language definition (if it exists, I don't know) would only matter for
functions - simple comparisons that have no side effect would be fine to simply
omit.
Tobias
> Am 19.09.2017 um 23:42 schrieb Jan Bredenbeek via Ql-Users
> :
>
> On 19 September 2017 at 23:36, Tobias Fröschle via Ql-U
On 19 September 2017 at 23:36, Tobias Fröschle via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
> Neither Turbo nor QLiberator do short-circuit evaluation.
> C68 does.
>
Because it's part of the language definition.
Jan
--
*Jan Bredenbeek* | Hilversum, NL | j...@bredenbeek.net
__
Neither Turbo nor QLiberator do short-circuit evaluation.
C68 does.
Tobias
> Am 19.09.2017 um 23:25 schrieb Jan Bredenbeek via Ql-Users
> :
>
> On 19 September 2017 at 21:27, Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users <
> ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just a rant about the SBasic AND
On 19 September 2017 at 21:27, Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just a rant about the SBasic AND operator.
>
> Suppose this:
>
> 10 a=0
> 20 b=10
> 30 if (a<>0 AND b/a=5)
> 40 do_something
> 50 end if
>
> Run it and what happens?
>
> You get an "overf
30 if (a<>0 AND b/a=5)
The first condition (a<>0) is NOT met and so, in any other
programming
language I use, the second condition isn't even tested, as the result
will be "false" anyway because of this.
Standard BASIC approach is to evaluate first expression, store the
result somewhere
On 19/09/2017 22:02, Dilwyn Jones via Ql-Users wrote:
I take it Dave means it fits in 48K, don't expect too much.
What, I can't expect perfection in 48 K (and SMSQE is much larger)?
grin
Wolfgang
___
QL-Users Mailing List
Hi,
I know it's been around for ages. It still irks. Sucking it up only
helps for so long
Wolfgang
Yes, its dumb, but the problem has been there since the day day dot. So
suck it up and work around :)
Per
On 19 September 2017 at 21:55, Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v
Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users wrote:
> Just a rant about the SBasic AND operator.
>
> Suppose this:
>
> 10 a=0
> 20 b=10
> 30 if (a<>0 AND b/a=5)
> 40 do_something
> 50 end if
>
> Run it and what happens?
>
> You get an "overflow" error at line 30.
> You get this error because it is trying to
Yes, its dumb, but the problem has been there since the day day dot. So
suck it up and work around :)
Per
On 19 September 2017 at 21:55, Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
> On 19/09/2017 21:32, Dave Park via Ql-Users wrote:
>
>> Your BASIC interpreter fits in 48K. W
I take it Dave means it fits in 48K, don't expect too much.
Dilwyn
-Original Message-
From: Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 8:55 PM
To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com
Cc: Wolfgang Lenerz
Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Stupid AND
On 19/09/2017 21:32, Dave Park v
On 19/09/2017 21:32, Dave Park via Ql-Users wrote:
Your BASIC interpreter fits in 48K. With room to spare.
And?
(pun intended)
Wolfgang
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Just a rant about the SBasic AND operator.
Supp
Your BASIC interpreter fits in 48K. With room to spare.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Wolfgang Lenerz via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just a rant about the SBasic AND operator.
>
> Suppose this:
>
> 10 a=0
> 20 b=10
> 30 if (a<>0 AND b/a=5)
> 40 do_something
> 5
14 matches
Mail list logo