Anonymous | Login | 2024-10-03 16:51 MSK |
Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap | My Account |
View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
0000026 | Sanny Builder | [All Projects] compiler | public | 2014-04-13 17:57 | 2014-04-13 17:59 | ||||
Reporter | Seemann | ||||||||
Assigned To | Seemann | ||||||||
Priority | normal | Severity | major | Reproducibility | always | ||||
Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||||||
Platform | OS | OS Version | |||||||
Product Version | 3.2.0 | ||||||||
Target Version | 3.2.1 | Fixed in Version | 3.2.1 | ||||||
Summary | 0000026: a single IF condition with a number on the left parsed as an IF parameter | ||||||||
Description | When you use a single condition with the IF keyword on the same line and this condition begins with a number, the compiler threats this number as a parameter for the IF opcode. WHILE TRUE IF 3 > 0@ ELSE_DO BREAK IF 6 > $5779(0@,3i) THEN SET_CHAR_HEALTH $5622(0@,3i) 0 END 0@ += 1 END After the IF 3 > 0@ line the compiler expects four conditions to follow, but there's only one, thus an error message appears. Until it's fixed possible solutions to avoid this bug are: 1. let the IF keyword be alone on the line, and a condition goes next line: IF 3 > 0@ ELSE_DO BREAK 2. use an opcode after the IF keyword IF 001B: 3 > 0@ ELSE_DO BREAK | ||||||||
Tags | No tags attached. | ||||||||
Attached Files | |||||||||
Issue History | |||
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
2014-04-13 17:57 | Seemann | New Issue | |
2014-04-13 17:57 | Seemann | Status | new => assigned |
2014-04-13 17:57 | Seemann | Assigned To | => Seemann |
2014-04-13 17:59 | Seemann | Status | assigned => resolved |
2014-04-13 17:59 | Seemann | Fixed in Version | => 3.2.1 |
2014-04-13 17:59 | Seemann | Resolution | open => fixed |
Copyright © 2000 - 2024 MantisBT Team |