Any idea why this crashes LB 4.5.1 compiler but not LB5??

[tenochtitlanuk]

' This triggers LB 4.5.1 compiler error/crash but not LB5!!!

print "Function r$( )", r$( 1)
print "Function c( )", c( 0)
print "Function s( )", s( 1)

wait

function r$( f): r$ ="OK": end function
function c( t): c =999: end function
function s( t): s =666: end function

[Carl Gundel]

Apr 15, 2022 6:43:23 GMT -5 tenochtitlanuk said:

' This triggers LB 4.5.1 compiler error/crash but not LB5!!!

print "Function r$( )", r$( 1)
print "Function c( )", c( 0)
print "Function s( )", s( 1)

wait

function r$( f): r$ ="OK": end function
function c( t): c =999: end function
function s( t): s =666: end function

Interesting. I'll have a look.

It's a completely different compiler, so any bugs or quirks will be different.

[Walt Decker]

The problem appears to be another bug in the parser here:

function r$( f): r$ ="OK": end function
function c( t): c =999: end function
function s( t): s =666: end function


It appears that the parser is interpreting the ":" as something else.

Quick fix:

function r$( f)
r$ ="OK"
end function

function c( t)
c =999
end function

function s( t)
s =666
end function


[tenochtitlanuk]

For me I'd noted that the error disappeeared if you three-lined ONE of the in-line fn definitions....

[Walt Decker]

In LB Pro this produces the compile time error: "Cannot define a sub inside another function or sub"
'
function r$( f): r$ ="OK": end function

function c( t)
c =999
end function

function s( t): s =666 :end function

'

So, the parser is not correctly recognizing the colons in the first function definition.

[Carl Gundel]

Apr 21, 2022 9:57:32 GMT -5 Walt Decker said:

In LB Pro this produces the compile time error: "Cannot define a sub inside another function or sub"
'
function r$( f): r$ ="OK": end function

function c( t)
c =999
end function

function s( t): s =666 :end function

'

So, the parser is not correctly recognizing the colons in the first function definition.

Unless I put out a v4.5.2 release (unlikely) this is not going to be fixed.

[Walt Decker]

Unless I put out a v4.5.2 release (unlikely) this is not going to be fixed.

If the parser bugs I and others have found in v4.5.2 and PRO are not to be fixed, perhaps you should consider removing it from the market.

[Carl Gundel]

Apr 21, 2022 13:43:49 GMT -5 Walt Decker said:

Unless I put out a v4.5.2 release (unlikely) this is not going to be fixed.

If the parser bugs I and others have found in v4.5.2 and PRO are not to be fixed, perhaps you should consider removing it from the market.

Why would I do that?  I hope you will understand that your suggestion is counterproductive.  People use Liberty BASIC and enjoy it and they routinely thank me that it exists.  I have fixed many bugs and provided bug fix releases over the years, but I cannot spend my time working on LB4 when people have been patiently waiting for LB5.

[tenochtitlanuk]

Sorry it was my comment on this quirky behaviour that led to this thread. I have always been impressed with the 99.9% of LB that works faultlessly. Wish my own brain was equally reliable... and strongly agree that time is better spent now on LB5 development.

More power to your elbow Carl!

[Rod]

Hmmm….. perfection is a burden none of us should carry. I am perfectly happy with Liberty as it stands and get many hours of enjoyment from it. Why on earth would you want it withdrawn?

[Walt Decker]

You will probably ban me for this. That is fine.
I said:

If the parser bugs I and others have found in v4.5.2 and PRO are not to be fixed, perhaps you should consider removing it from the market.

(should be v4.5.1)

Mr. Gundel said:

Why would I do that?

I can think of several reasons but I will mention only the least important.
1.
2.
3
4. I know of no software provider who will not repair failing code when a replacement product is not in place unless he has terminated his operation.

You could drop back to a previous version.
You could mention up front that the current version has a few "quirks" and refer the potential purchaser to a release notes site.

Mr. Gundel said:

I hope you will understand that your suggestion is counterproductive.

No. What is counterproductive is a development tool that has "quirks".

Mr. Gundel said:

People use Liberty BASIC and enjoy it and they routinely thank me that it exists. I have fixed many bugs and provided bug fix releases over the years, but I cannot spend my time working on LB4 when people have been patiently waiting for LB5.[\quote]

No comment.

[Rod]

For pity sake Walt. It does not have “quirks”, like all similar software it has esoteric bugs that very few people will ever encounter.

Liberty functions very well and it has drawn yourself into its simplicity. Only you choose to pick faults at extreme parsing errors. Neither do you acknowledge the power of the : continuation which works in 99.99% of coding phrases.

If you are not enjoying Liberty then leave it alone. But stop throwing esoteric brickbats about.

Carl is coding solutions, many developers leave versions behind, Liberty is no different.

If you feel like contributing on a positive basis carry on, please lose this ultra negative vibe it does you no favours.

[tsh73]

I know of no software provider who will not repair failing code when a replacement product is not in place unless he has terminated his operation

LOL
(on programmer's forums ) I heard of reported bugs in software living for years.
I do not say it is good thing - but it is pretty common, and pretend it is not is just to wish for pink ponies world.

My own two pet peeves:
Excel 2007 had selection shading so light it wasn't visible on some monitors.
Naturally folks complained.
Solution? Nothing changed till next major version.

Visual C 2010 came without intellisence support. It used to work fine in VC 2008.
Folks complained.
Solution? It did got fixed till next major version.

[Brandon Parker]

I know of no software provider who will not repair failing code when a replacement product is not in place unless he has terminated his operation

I enter into evidence...Windows VISTA...


{:0)

Brandon Parker

[BeeTrap]

I probably should not step into the room full of Moderators and Gurus.....but
I have a folder named "LBPE_Bugs_Gotchas" where I store any Bug Report that I could get, especially off of the old Conforums site.
The first screenshot I just opened was from Rod, dated 05-10-2017 stating that: "Liberty Basic Bug Tracker closing". As long as
any "odd" behavior has a work-around, I am OK with almost anything. I am lucky to have saved some of the "bug" info that may
effect me at some point. I will have to wait a while on LB5, not "good" at LB4.5.1 Pro yet, but I'm trying and loving it!