From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,195c1254d862280d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 114c38,195c1254d862280d
X-Google-Attributes: gid114c38,public
From: smize@news.imagin.net (Samuel Mize)
Subject: Re: syntax completion - a bad thing?
Date: 1997/02/11
Message-ID: <5dqr0t$nk2@prime.imagin.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 218111223
references: <32F91629.5F9@vsl.com.au> <dewar.855234467@merv>
organization: ImagiNet Communications Ltd, Arlington, Texas
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.os.vxworks
Date: 1997-02-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.855234467@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>Andrew says
>
>"It seems to me that syntax completion, as a step during
>compilation, is not a good thing as it *repairs* errors
>rather than report them (eg. unpaired begin/ends).  The
>obvious risk being that incorrect code will quite happily be
>"repaired" (very possibly, incorrectly) and will compile
>successfully."
>
>
>This must be a misunderstanding, no Ada compiler can possibly have as
>its standard or only operating mode one in which errors are silently
>ignored. It would be impossible to validate such a compiler, and since
>the Rational compilers are validated (the observations apply equally
>to Ada 83 and Ada 95), you must be misunderstanding ...
>

The editor does syntax completion silently when you save the file.
This appears to the user as if it is happening at compilation.

In addition, you can compile from the editor; this saves the file to
disk so the compiler can get at it.  Since it saves, it does a
syntax completion.

I assume they did the validation suite from existing disk files, so
the editing suite didn't come into the picture.

Another message states how to turn it off (set switch
REJECT_SYNTAX_ERRORS = true for the working view).

Syntax completion can be is nice, but I have written so much code
without it that it's faster and easier, for me, to just type in the
full syntax.  Besides, it doesn't work well during maintenance, when
you are altering existing code structures.

With Apex, it took me almost a full day to locate how the editor had
embugged my code after I accidentally deleted an "end;" and Apex
put it back somewhere else.  Of course, once you realize the editor
might have altered your code behind your back, you start looking for
that a lot sooner.  You also start editing your files with vi or
emacs, and just using Apex as a compiler.

I had to bang on Rational for some time to find out how to turn
syntax completion off.  I'm not sure if they added it after I (and,
I'm sure, others) complained, or if it was there all along but I
never got hold of anyone who knew more than the company line, which
was "but that's a great feature, you certainly want to use it!"

Samuel Mize