[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [open-cobol-list] Bug List comments
From: |
Bill Klein |
Subject: |
RE: [open-cobol-list] Bug List comments |
Date: |
Mon Nov 1 16:16:17 2004 |
I may be mistaken, but if it matters, I can't find any reason why one could
NOT user "VALUE NULL" in an 88-level associated with a pointer (or
procedure-pointer) in the '02 Standard.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Roger While
> Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 11:59 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden
> Subject: [open-cobol-list] Bug List comments
>
> The compiler abort problem (sy012.cob) is caused
> by a negated test on an 88 level for a pointer item.
> Like this :
> 01 XXX.
> 03 MYPTR POINTER VALUE NULL.
> 88 MYPTR-NULL VALUE NULL.
>
> IF NOT MYPTR-NULL
> ....
>
> Question here is if it is valid to have an 88 on a
> POINTER item ? The only use I can see is exactly as
> above (and in sy012.cob) to test for NULL.
> ACU rejects the 88, MF accepts it but according to MF doc
> it shouldn't - Hmm.
>
> Keisuke ? Bernard ? Thoughts ? Reject the 88 or not ?
>
> For info: the problem appears in typeck.c in
> function expr_reduce - case "!". TREE_CLASS is
> POINTER, therefore cb_build_binary_op gets called
> with parameter expr_op which is 0.
>
> Roger
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE
> LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> open-cobol-list mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-cobol-list
>