From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Range Check Query
Date: 19 Nov 1994 11:58:58 -0500
Date: 1994-11-19T11:58:58-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3alasi$9eg@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: EACHUS.94Nov18121126@spectre.mitre.org
"If the compiler is smart enough [to recognize that a comparison of a value
of limited range with a constant is always False], it should probably warn .."
First, that's not an easy check to do, it certainly doesn't fall out free,
because it requires the generalized notion of the subtype of a result, where
in the language we are only ever interested in the base type for operands
of an operator. Certainly it could be done with a special check.
Second, are you really *sure* that you want this warning. Yes I know you
can suppress warnings, but the trick is to keep warnings useful so that
people don't need to suppress them in normal cases.
I an very dubious that this is a desirable approach
Robert Eachus' analysis of the original question is certainly quite
correct, there is no basis to expect range constraint to be raised
in either situation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1994-11-19 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1994-11-18 15:27 Range Check Query Bob Wells #402
1994-11-18 12:11 ` Robert I. Eachus
1994-11-19 16:58 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1994-11-21 10:57 ` Robert I. Eachus
1994-11-20 17:16 ` Do-While Jones
1994-11-21 16:00 ` Norman H. Cohen
1994-11-23 17:31 ` Kent Mitchell
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox