Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 06:38:26 04/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2002 at 09:28:48, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On April 19, 2002 at 09:18:02, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On April 19, 2002 at 05:38:16, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On April 19, 2002 at 03:53:35, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> if (pawn_rank[LIGHT][f] == 6); /* pawn hasn't moved */ >>>> ^ >>>>eval.c(335) : Warning 7: possible extraneous ';' >>>> if (pawn_rank[DARK][f] == 1); >>>> ^ >>>>eval.c(382) : Warning 7: possible extraneous ';' >>> >>>Is TSCP buggy? >>> >>>I think this is a very valuable warning, too bad neither >>>MSVC, Intel C or gcc don't have it. >> >>Are you sure? I have seen once this warning in my program (it was a typo) >>and I only use MVSC and cygwin. I wonder if it is because I had all the warnings >>on. Maybe my memory is tricking me. >> >>Anyway >> >>if (bool_var); >> >>is a terrible style. >>Much better could be >> >>if (bool_var) >> ; >> >>IMHO, of course. >> >>Regards, >>Miguel > >Well, since the only reason for these constructs is either a bug or an intended >side-effect, I consider both version approx equally terrible. :) It is morning and I am drunk already. I agree with you, what I had in my mind are examples using "while" rather than "if". while (something()) ; It is not a favorite of mine but you can see it often. That is better than while (something()); Regards, Miguel > >But then, the next version of C++ will probably declare the semicolon as an >operator and it will also be overloadable one. ;) > >Sargon
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.