Another problem for release:
If you use -w3 easily GPF is produced
and they are wrong warnings. for example says:
at line 36
PROCEDURE Main( cAppArg )
says:
prg\Senior.prg(234) Warning W0003 Variable: 'CAPPARG' declared but not used in
function: 'MAIN(36)'
but is used at line 96
I think is not prepared yet:
PROCEDURE Main()
LOCAL b := ||
RETURN Nil
--- compile error ---
RETURN
this sample says
test.prg(5) Error E0030 Syntax error: syntax error at 'ERROR'
when it should to say
test.prg(7) Error E0030 Syntax error:
2008-06-03 06:12 UTC-0430 Ron Pinkas ron/at/xharbour.com
* source/compiler/harbour.c
* Fixed hb_compVariableGetPos() was setting VV_USED only for
warning level lower than 3
* Block unused variable was reported for only warning level
greater than 4, reset to greater than 0
2008-06-03 06:45 UTC-0430 Ron Pinkas ron/at/xharbour.com
* source/vm/hvm.c
* Minor typo in last commit
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: Ron Pinkas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A: xHarbour-Developers List xharbour-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Data invio: martedì 3 giugno 2008 12.53
Oggetto: [xHarbour-developers] 2008-06-03 06:12 UTC-0430 Ron
Pinkasron/at/xharbour.com
2008-06-03 06:12 UTC-0430 Ron
I think is not prepared yet:
PROCEDURE Main()
LOCAL b := ||
RETURN Nil
--- compile error ---
RETURN
this example says :
test.prg(5) Error E0030 Syntax error: syntax error at 'ERROR'
instead of :
test.prg(7) Error E0030 Syntax error:
2008-06-03 13:07 UTC-0430 Ron Pinkas ron/at/xharbour.com
* source/compiler/harbour.c
* Block unused variable was wrongly corrected to report unused
block vars for any warning level, should be = 2
-
This SF.net
Ron
I'll compile today CVS on linux and run the hbtest sample that Andi reported
with GPF on mt few days ago,
i'll run and confirm if fix was ok
Regards
Luiz
- Original Message -
From: Ron Pinkas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Luiz Rafael Culik Guimaraes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Ron
Last changes fixed all GPF reported with hbtest program on MT mode reported
by codeguard and valgrind logs
Regards
Luiz
- Original Message -
From: Ron Pinkas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Luiz Rafael Culik Guimaraes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: xharbour-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent:
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: Ron Pinkas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A: Enrico Maria Giordano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: xHarbour-Developers List xharbour-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Data invio: martedì 3 giugno 2008 19.39
Oggetto: Re: [xHarbour-developers] 2008-06-03 06:12 UTC-0430 Ron
Enrico,
IMO there's no distinction and we are talking about a generic aspect
of code quality, but it can be done. :-)
IMO, it's the same as wanting the warning with STATIC vars but in
with LOCAL vars, etc., it still can be done because technically
there's a distinction, but in terms of
11 matches
Mail list logo
