Masaharu Goto wrote: > > Patrick, > > Thank you for specifying the problem in detail. > I can improve CINT with this kind of feedback > > >i think that many of the > >users of ROOT/CINT are novice C++ programmers and are astonished that > >code that did run in script mode does not compile. having a more > >restrictive environment (such as pointing out that '->' is not equal > >to '.') would also solve some subtle problems. i personally don't care about > >saving a few keystrokes (2 vs. 1 in the above example) unless you know > >what you are doing. > > Under such situation, I agree with you. CINT is in favor of sloppy scripting. > As long as the meaning is understandable, it accepts wrong syntax. This is > a design philosophy issue. Whether to take strictness or sloppiness. > It is possible to display warning message. The problem is transition to > new behavior. Some people will be surprised by the warning message which > did not come up before. Need to think how to avoid confusion. > > Rene, how do you think about Patrick's comment? > We discussed this issue a long time ago. Personally, I am in favour of a sloppy syntax at the command line only. CINT should issue a Warning (not an error) in case of C++ syntax violation in a macro. Rene Brun
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 04 2000 - 00:43:29 MET