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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,15c6ed4b761968e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,gid101deb,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!ken-transit.news.telstra.net!lon-in.news.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "robin" <robin_v@bigpond.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1
References: <mubcg.13522$fb2.853@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
 <epcs4e.qb8.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05>
 <0ugu4e.4i7.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
 <PkHcg.90575$Fs1.7198@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <To_cg.10095$S7.4017@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <%P_cg.155733$eR6.26337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <6H9dg.10258$S7.9150@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <XVadg.76594$_S7.45873@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
 <1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature>
 <pan.2006.05.25.12.11.52.919554@linuxchip.demon.co.uk.uk.uk>
 <2006052509454116807-gsande@worldnetattnet> <4475DA0F.5030603@comcast.net>
 <2006052514574816807-gsande@worldnetattnet> <m2r72h69vz.fsf@grendel.local>
 <e56c7o$94o$1@apollo.cs.kuleuven.ac.be>
 <2OEdg.167448$eR6.128849@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <dnZdg.11932$S7.8335@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <2006052712085316807-gsande@worldnetattnet>
Subject: Re: Checking for Undefined
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <Gy6eg.12060$S7.11688@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 00:56:06 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.134.49.114
X-Complaints-To: abuse@bigpond.net.au
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1148777766 144.134.49.114 (Sun,
 28 May 2006 10:56:06 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 10:56:06 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4555 comp.lang.fortran:10365
 comp.lang.pl1:1781
Date: 2006-05-28T00:56:06+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Gordon Sande" <g.sande@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:2006052712085316807-gsande@worldnetattnet...

> The practical man is likly to say that the problem here is the
> GENERATION of the undefined values. That is when the execution should
> be flagged as erroneous. Letting them be and tracking them is
> awkward but seems to be an invented problem that is more the
> unintended result of the particular wording. Assign the problem
> to a thesis student and let the real world gt on with doing real
> things. If undefined variable checking were to be part of the
> standard then this is an issue that might deserve better wording
> but I would not expect it make any realistic checklist.

Checking undefined variables has been around for a long time
(more than 3 decades, maybe 4), and successfully in notable compilers
such as WATFOR/WATFIV and PL/C.
You will find that it's offered in some current Fortran compilers.