Hello everybody I have noticed the same nehaviour with old code that containded +string(something) the '+' having no left hand side bit of string.
I think that this an example of a more general approach by recent Scilab team: make coding more restrictive for the -laudable- goal of making it more rigourous, This comes however at the price of less flexibility (I have for example in mind the impossibility with the 6.0 family to have string on several lines ending with '...' to signal that the string contrinues on next line) and ascending compatibility for old code (with the risk of losing old users). As we say in French 'le mieux est l'ennemi du bien" (better is the enemy of what is good). Regards Éric <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Garanti sans virus. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> Le jeu. 21 févr. 2019 à 22:56, Samuel Gougeon <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hello Vilppu, > > Le 21/02/2019 à 11:14, Vilppu a écrit : > > Hello, > > Has anyone tried using code generation on my example model? > > I installed the new Scilab 6.0.2 and with that I get even less far with code > generation. When trying code generation I get this Scilab pop-up window > message: > Undefined operation for the given operands. check or define function %c_a > for overloading. > > > The reason *why* this error now occurs is known. But the point is that we > need > to know *where* exactly this occurs in the code. So, in the message, > wasn't there > any indication about the *location* of the error, the function, and the > line number, > the stack of nested calls? > Was "Undefined operation for the given operands. check or define function > %c_a for overloading. " > the whole message? > As for the "operation +" warning or error after "warning stop", not having > more detail > about where exactly the error occurs is rather blocking to debug the code. > > For my part, i have no compiler on my computer ; so i can't reproduce the > issue. > > We can't be surprised that the next steps fail. Issues must be fixed step > by step, > in the order they appear. > > Regards > Samuel > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users >
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
