| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wahorger
Joined: 13 Oct 2014
Posts: 1226
Location: Morrison, CO, USA
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:03 pm Post subject: /CHECK_WINIO and other compile messages |
 |
|
Paul, thought it might be better to have a different thread for /CHECK_WINIO.
One thing I did find "confusing" (could be just me): when arguments have been swapped, specifically when a callback and variable are swapped. The error message given when this occurs is (example) "error 1222 - Argument number 2 (ABCD) of WINIO@ should be a 32 bit integer".
The text of the 1222 message could be made clearer i.e. "Argument number 2 (ABCD) of WINIO@ should be a 32 bit integer function"., identifying the type of the argument that should be present.
It is exceptionally nice to have the argument position and variable name defined explicitly! It really helps.
The error message for a LOGICAL (or REAL*4) in the wrong place (error 140) is explicit, but does not identify the variable or its position in the argument. This error is not dependent on /CHECK_WINIO, which is nice because compilation can continue. But for complex winio@() calls, it can take a while to figure things out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LitusSaxonicum
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 2393
Location: Yateley, Hants, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bill,
My suggestion is don't have complicated WINIO@ calls. It makes life so much simpler if they are short, even if it makes subprograms longer.
A good subset of rules is:
(a) Only one input box per WINIO@, although all the stuff like %ill, %bg etc can go with it.
(b) A run of format codes that are simply positioning can go in a single WINIO@ (like %ff%2nl%cn etc) with no parameters of callbacks
(c) Simplify %mn and toolbar creation statements
(d) For the main window creation, separate the parts into different subroutines, e.g. one for menus, one for the toolbar, one for startup and close down, one for the client area etc.
(e) Use inline comments every fifth WINIO@ continuation so you can count them easily. Also use inline comments to match %ob and %cb.
(f) Minimise the number of callback functions in any one WINIO@ call.
Eddie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler
Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 8019
Location: Salford, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bill
Again I am confused. The following code...
| Code: | program main
integer iw,winio@
iw = winio@("%^bt[OK]",iw)
end |
gives
| Quote: | | error 1222 - Argument number 2 (IW) of WINIO@ should be a call-back function |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler
Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 8019
Location: Salford, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bill
The behaviour for REAL*4 has already been improved.
The following code...
| Code: | program main
integer iw,winio@
real x
iw = winio@("%rf",x)
end |
will give
| Quote: | | error 140 - WINIO@ cannot process REAL(KIND=1) argument X, only CHARACTER, INTEGER(3) or REAL(2) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wahorger
Joined: 13 Oct 2014
Posts: 1226
Location: Morrison, CO, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul, thanks this will be an improvement at the next version. Looking forward to it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wahorger
Joined: 13 Oct 2014
Posts: 1226
Location: Morrison, CO, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Paul, sorry; should have posted the sample code for the error.
| Code: |
use mswin
integer,external:: abcd
integer:: defg
i = winio@('%^rd',abcd,defg)
end
|
yields
| Quote: |
ForumTesting.F95(4) : error 1222 - Argument number 2 (ABCD) of WINIO@ should be a 32 bit integer
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler
Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 8019
Location: Salford, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
The compiler does not know the relationship between the format string for winio@ and its arguments but if you use /CHECK_WINIO then it will call into the ClearWin+ library (DLL) in order to attempt a check. But this is not always possible particularly when the outcome depends on the runtime order of a sequence of winio@ calls.
You can put the format string into a dynamically constructed CHARACTER variable or call ClearWin+ functions that stack up the arguments before calling winio@. In these cases the compiler does not have a chance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2867
Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:34 pm Post subject: Re: |
|
|
I may exaggerate a bit or use not precise wording about diagnostics messages but hopefully not too much. Though i was a fan of tough at English slang UK tech site TheInquirer for two+ decades, my own vocabulary have not progressed due to lack of practice with my penguins. OK, to me this wording of error is good
| Quote: |
ForumTesting.F95(4) : error 1222 - Argument number 2 (ABCD) of WINIO@ should be a 32 bit integer
|
adding also at the end "or INTEGER(N)" (few people know but i don't what the N is here. But with this message we will finally know). When in rare and hence definitely confusing cases the 32/64bit integers are needed depending on 32/64 compiler, the message should tell to use universal INTEGER (7) specifically set for that purpose
And i agree with John that the warning should be more specific, which is in 99% compiler capable doing. But even his suggestion
| Quote: |
error 149 - For Format '%rf' argument X is declared as xxxxx when it should be real(2)
|
requires translation in tired and confused programmer's brain. Better would be
| Quote: |
error 149 - For Format '%rf' argument X is declared as xxxxx when it should be REAL(2) or DOUBLE PRECISION |
Was there any legitimate reason to start calling double precision as REAL(2) ? If there is no any chance to feed Clearwin+ controls with any other own programmer-made precision besides REAL*8 then why the heck to follow Fortran Standard's recommendations which are actually just confusing people with their REAL(1), REAL(2), REAL(3), INTEGER (2), INTEGER (3) names which tell person nothing. And there also CHARACTER added to this glorious universal Clearwin error message -- all this just confuses poor programmer to the boiling point  Have i told that i learned English not so elitist urban dictionary mostly trying programming Clearwin GUIs? Now all looks nice and cool, but i can imagine what novices feel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
