mclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) (12/28/87)
Sometime back, I wrote: <> While I got y'all's attention, why does Power-C 128 like to generate <> "Syntax Errors" on what appears to be perfectly good code? And Eric Green responded: >Hmm? Methinks you're talking about "ced". I used the "check" feature of "ced" >to check my syntax maybe three or four times, and each time it said that a >bunch of things were syntax errors -- when they compiled right away when I >tried compiling them (e.g. the CASM posted to the net eons ago). And with red face, I munch down on crow pot pie. That which "ced" rejects as an error is not always rejected by the compiler itself. I tried feeding my code to the compiler instead of the "check" function, and no problem. <<<infra-red lamp ON (low)>>> Sheesh. One would think that whoever's in charge of this package would have used the same code in the compiler & ced to do syntax checking. Where's the QE department? <<<infra-red lamp OFF>>> Oh well. Power-C and I are getting to know each other a little better now, and will most likely become good friends. Has anyone compiled (oops :-) a list of bugs in Power-C that they'd like to post (or mail; I'll summarize)? I know about the float-to-int conversion bug and fix; has anyone run across anything else? For example, is peek() buggy or just poorly documented? Larry Kollar ...!gatech!dcatla!mclek Tech writing is 20% inspiration and 80% plagiarism.