|
> I can see the reasoning behind this because you would have some pretty mad > customers if they had to "fix" hundreds of programs, but I also think that > the problems that could result from not throwing an error could be even more > troublesome than somebody having to go in and code a simple INZ for data > structures. Fixing errors based on the compiler listing is cake, fixing > errors because a data structure wasn't initialized can be evasive. And it's a good thought Aaron, but INZ is NOT mandatory. In fact, I rely on static variables (as in not initialised) in many of my procedures. Whether to initialise or not is really a design decision, rather than a compiler decision. I have no problem at all with a low severity warning because I can always turn up the heat by changing the message file. --buck
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.