Cobol - Re: Syntax

Author

Re: Syntax

Lueko Willms

2004-03-28, 9:50 pm

Am 28.03.04
schrieb ricksmith@mfi.net (Rick Smith)
auf /COMP/LANG/COBOL
in 106dtig4llm6d99@corp.supernews.com
ueber Re: Syntax (was: Perfrom Thru

RS> Pete, you are wrong. 'It' is about source violating the rules of the
RS> standard. Note that Mr Dwarf wrote '... the rules for said language';
RS> not '... the syntax rules for said language'.
RS>
RS> Mr Dwarf objected to the use of 'syntax error' to describe the
RS> violation and the his objection was based upon a common definition
RS> of syntax; not 'the rules for said language'.
RS>
RS> Note that the content of any diagnostic message was not mentioned.

Sure, but any limitations imposed by a concrete implementation of an
abstract standard are errors in syntax.

Some compilers will simply categorize this as "E" or "Error", count
it as such, and will give a concrete explanation in the error message
itself, like "ELSE not preceded by IF" or "Too many subscripts" and so
on, or "Can't continue since the object would become to big".

And I thing the discussion has gone already too long. No new
arguments are being raised. Let's stop it here.

Yours,
Lüko Willms http://www.mlwerke.de
/--------- L.WILLMS@jpberlin.de -- Alle Rechte vorbehalten --

"Nach meiner Ansicht besitzt die Presse _das_ _Recht_,
Schriftsteller, Politiker, Komödianten und andere öffentliche
Charaktere zu _beleidigen_. Achtete ich [so einen Angriff gegen mich]
einer Notiz wert, so galt mir in solchen Fällen der Wahlspruch: à
corsaire, corsaire et demi [auf einen Schelmen anderthalben]."
- Karl Marx 17.11.1860 (Herr Vogt, Kapitel XI)

Rick Smith

2004-03-28, 9:50 pm

Lueko Willms <l.willms@jpberlin.de> wrote in message
news:95jJFQJeflB@jpberlin-l.willms.jpberlin.de...
[snip]
> And I thing the discussion has gone already too long. No new
> arguments are being raised. Let's stop it here.

It cannot have gone on too long because it has not been
resolved. One more point needs to be raised, in context.
One or two more exchanges should do it.

Lueko Willms

2004-03-30, 5:30 pm

Am 30.03.04
schrieb dashwood@enternet.co.nz (Peter E. C. Dashwood)
auf /COMP/LANG/COBOL
in b3638c46.0403300645.659c53d1@posting.google.com
ueber Re: Syntax (was: Perfrom Thru

PECD>
PECD> The fact that a compiler detects "something's wrong" does NOT make
PECD> it a syntax error by any definition of the word, apart from the
PECD> definition people like yourself wrote into the standard.

In most cases it is.

An implementation where e.g. the Report Writer module is not
implemented will flag INITATE, TERMINATE, and GENERATE statements als
syntax errors, although these are correct in the abstract syntax of
the standard.

But the implementation is optional.

I find this whole discussion quite obsolete.

Yours,
Lüko Willms http://www.mlwerke.de
/--------- L.WILLMS@jpberlin.de -- Alle Rechte vorbehalten --

"Es sind nicht die Generäle und Könige, die die Geschichte machen,
sondern die breiten Massen des Volkes" - Nelson Mandela

docdwarf@panix.com

2004-03-30, 11:30 pm

In article <95rVgke9flB@jpberlin-l.willms.jpberlin.de>,
Lueko Willms <l.willms@jpberlin.de> wrote:

[snip]

> I find this whole discussion quite obsolete.

It may be seen as exquisitely generous, Mr Willms, that despite this
vision you see fit to grace it and extend it with your participation.

DD

Sponsored Links