On Monday 19 May 2008 00:50, Lukas Grunwald wrote:
Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
1) Change the nasl compiler to force all variables to be
explictly declared;
2) Default undeclared variables to a local scope;
3) Have a lint style checker that examined functions and
Thomas,
On Thursday 15 May 2008 23:30, Thomas Reinke wrote:
Some thoughts we've had:
1) Change the nasl compiler to force all variables to be
explictly declared;
2) Default undeclared variables to a local scope;
3) Have a lint style checker that examined functions and
On Thursday 15 May 2008 23:53, Michel Arboi wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Thomas Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Variables in a function in NASL do not _need_ to be declared.
Isn't it magical?
I guess it is more a conceptual element of the NASL programming
language. Its not a new
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Jan-Oliver Wagner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that Thomas is wrong?
Or at least, not very precise.
Maybe I already had it.
Are you saying you even implemented this already?
IIRC, since the beginning of NASL2.
Why are you in doubt?
I am not in
Jan,
Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
Thomas,
On Thursday 15 May 2008 23:30, Thomas Reinke wrote:
Some thoughts we've had:
1) Change the nasl compiler to force all variables to be
explictly declared;
2) Default undeclared variables to a local scope;
3) Have a lint style checker
Michel Arboi wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Jan-Oliver Wagner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that Thomas is wrong?
Or at least, not very precise.
Maybe I already had it.
Are you saying you even implemented this already?
IIRC, since the beginning of NASL2.
Why are
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Thomas Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Variables in a function in NASL do not _need_ to be declared.
Isn't it magical?
If the variable is not declared at all, it will be created, automatically,
with a global scope.
Or maybe not? Who knows?
1) Change
