|
Re: Better code check before compile?
That is exactly what I have on my mind in post #8.
Maybe it will be useful if compiler give just warning about missing RETUN.
But That wouldn't prevent bad stuff from happening same as it throwing an error wouldn't prevent that. So no real point of having it.
|
Re: Better code check before compile?
Another "bug" found - you can easily refer to out of array bounds and it won't give any error during compile
like
MAS var byte[5]
MAS[10]=20
Won't give any error or warning.
|
Re: Better code check before compile?
You may have found something you did not know and it IS something to be aware of but it's not a bug. It's like that by design.
It's all covered in details thru out section 7.6 in the manual - read it ;-)
/Henrik.
|
Re: Better code check before compile?
It is common to other languages too like C for example.
Ioannis
|
Re: Better code check before compile?
And the compiler is really only able (if so designed) to catch out-of-bounds error when you have a static index like that MAS[10]=20 but in many cases you're using an index variable like MAS[x]=20 and then there is no way for the compiler to know what x is going to be at runtime.
On your typical 80's computer running BASIC, like the ZX Spectrum referenced earlier, the execution was interpreted so the interpreter could catch out of bounds errors during execution. PBP isn't interpreted but say it was or that it in some other way COULD detect that out-of-bounds error - what should happen?
Last edited by HenrikOlsson; - 2nd November 2020 at 10:37.
|
Re: Better code check before compile?
Yes the example I have is static, not runtime occurrence.
|
Re: Better code check before compile?
Found another "bug" - if you put more DATA lines in code, than size of built-in eeprom, it will compile without errors, but PicKit 3 programmer will show you "Warning: Hex file loaded is larger than device."
Members who have read this thread : 1You do not have permission to view the list of names.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks