The right fix is to delete every nvar in your function (as far as I can understand), but in general if you remove the assignment it will be nice if the compiler return an error that you are making a concatenation - calculation on a non initialized variable. I think that something like that it will be nice as we will have a lot less runtime errors due to bad coding.
Brgds Mike Evans -----Original Message----- From: harbour-boun...@harbour-project.org [mailto:harbour-boun...@harbour-project.org] On Behalf Of Lorenzo Fiorini Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 7:28 PM To: Harbour Project Main Developer List. Subject: Re: [Harbour] -w3 optimizazion issue On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Mike Evans (Gmail) <makis1...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that in this example the warning is ok. You never used this > variable. As I can understand a variable is used only if it's a right > opponent of an expression or a function parameter (at least on first level > optimization). Yes, the warning is right but it drives to the wrong "fix". It's nVar++ the "more" useless code or at least both are useless. What I mean is that with the local nVar := 0 it gives the warning but it works while without it it says nothing but it doesn't work. best regards, Lorenzo _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
