Re: [bug-gawk] Another typeof() issue

[Aharon Robbins]

Hi.

> IIRC, another simple AWK truth is that any reference to a non-existing 
> array element creates this element as a scalar. So I am wondering if in 
> the below example typeof(a[1]) is really: untyped ?
>
> Hermann
>
> $ awk 'BEGIN{ print typeof(a[1]); a[1][2]}'
> untyped
> awk: cmd. line:1: fatal: attempt to use scalar `a["1"]' as an array

It is and it isn't.  a[1] never received a value, but it's not an
array. It's not any different than doing something like

        BEGIN {
                a[2]
        }

a[2] is both the null string and zero; internally it's untyped since
it never received a value.  I agree, it's not untyped in the sense
that it can become an array.

Does this look better?

        $ cat bar.awk 
        BEGIN {
                print typeof(x)
                print typeof(a[1])
                a[1][2]
        }
        $ ./gawk -f bar.awk 
        untyped
        scalar_u
        gawk: bar.awk:4: fatal: attempt to use scalar `a["1"]' as an array

This distinguishes between "never used" and "scalar but no value" (scalar_u).

In the meantime I have pushed a bunch of fixes from the other bug
reports.

I'm going to let this change (untyped vs. scalar_u) sit for a bit before
pushing it.

Thanks,

Arnold