Time warp.  You're replying to a message which hasn't been
posted yet and not providing a citation, which would be
logically impossible.

On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 06:33:49 -0500, Thomas David Rivers  wrote:

>I would love to see these "standard" tests... do you have a pointer to some?
>    ...
>One good example is where IBM doesn't match the standard, it doesn't always
>evaluate the operand of the LENGTH builtin (which could invoke a function) if 
>it can
>compute the result at compile-time.   So, even though the expression might 
>have a
>side-effect, it is not invoked.
>
I've been very familiar with the ISO/IEEE Pascal Standard, so I can say
(schematically):  if time() > 12:00 then X := 1/0
o should execute before noon without error (but do nothing)
o should report the divide check executing after  noon
o Should compile successfully with no error in constant folding
 (an informative WTF might be proper).

>IBM also has many extensions - you can use a "restricted expression" where a 
>constant
>is required in the standard; but IBM doesn't strictly define what this is.
>
Likewise, is the HLASM  lookahead well-specified?


>I'd love to see a set of "standard" tests though!
>
Including a "pedantic" mode to assist programmers following the
"strict" clause of Postel's Robustness Principle".  I strongly disagree
with the "lenient" clause.
See: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle> Criticism

-- 
gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to