[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] "picky" scrutinizer mode

From: Felix
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] "picky" scrutinizer mode
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 03:22:20 -0500 (EST)

From: Alan Post <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] "picky" scrutinizer mode
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 20:11:28 -0700

> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 05:35:22AM -0500, Felix wrote:
>> Hi!
>> I have added "-picky" to the experimental branch (I haven't created a
>> change request, since the impact is minimal and this feature is purely
>> optional). When given, the scrutinizer warns about undefined branches
>> in conditionals in tail-position of global procedures that do not
>> perform a self-call.  The scrutinizer does no inter-procedural
>> flow-analysis, so there is no warning for this situation for local
>> procedures which are called in tail-position (which, if I understood
>> correctly, is what Joerg would have liked most).
> Is there a (declare ...) syntax to mimic this command-line option?

No, not yet. I don't think using declarations for this is overly
practical, to be honest, since this should be independent of the


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]