Comments on: Appreciation for the VFP compiler http://rickschummer.com/blog2/2008/08/appreciation-for-the-vfp-compiler/ Shedding some light on topics of software development, Visual FoxPro, saving our planet, paying it forward, and anything else I find important enough to share. Sun, 13 Jan 2019 18:50:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Mike Lewis http://rickschummer.com/blog2/2008/08/appreciation-for-the-vfp-compiler/comment-page-1/#comment-629 Mike Lewis Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:49:00 +0000 http://rickschummer.com/blog2/2008/08/appreciation-for-the-vfp-compiler/#comment-629 <i>Initially looking a the ENDIF one might think this is invalid syntax .... FoxPro knows there is no valid syntax after the ENDIF so the rest of the line is completely ignored ... </i><br /><br />Similarly, VFP accepts the keyword THEN when placed after IF <i>condition</i>. For example:<br /><br />IF x = y THEN<br /> ? "OK"<br />ENDIF<br /><br />Not only does this not throw an error, but Intellisense recognises THEN as a keyword and renders it in blue upper case. <br /><br />Handy for ex-Basic folk, perhaps? Initially looking a the ENDIF one might think this is invalid syntax …. FoxPro knows there is no valid syntax after the ENDIF so the rest of the line is completely ignored …

Similarly, VFP accepts the keyword THEN when placed after IF condition. For example:

IF x = y THEN
? “OK”
ENDIF

Not only does this not throw an error, but Intellisense recognises THEN as a keyword and renders it in blue upper case.

Handy for ex-Basic folk, perhaps?

]]> By: Nants http://rickschummer.com/blog2/2008/08/appreciation-for-the-vfp-compiler/comment-page-1/#comment-630 Nants Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:35:00 +0000 http://rickschummer.com/blog2/2008/08/appreciation-for-the-vfp-compiler/#comment-630 <i>I guess the FoxPro compiler figures this is a mistake on your part and is doing you a favor by ignoring the problem.</i><br /><br />This is a good example of why I've stopped, and recommend against, VFP programmers trying too hard to protect programmers from passing bad or incomplete parameters. It's doing a disservice to all. Better to use an ASSERT when an unexpected type is passed or not enough parameters are passed. <br /><br />BTW, I had a similar experience recently with 9. Some native function...but I don't recall now what it was. Just was surprised. If I recall it will post. I guess the FoxPro compiler figures this is a mistake on your part and is doing you a favor by ignoring the problem.

This is a good example of why I’ve stopped, and recommend against, VFP programmers trying too hard to protect programmers from passing bad or incomplete parameters. It’s doing a disservice to all. Better to use an ASSERT when an unexpected type is passed or not enough parameters are passed.

BTW, I had a similar experience recently with 9. Some native function…but I don’t recall now what it was. Just was surprised. If I recall it will post.

]]>