Opened 14 years ago

Closed 13 years ago

#1750 closed Bug (No Bug)

Au3Check misrepresents undefined Call as critical

Reported by: anonymous Owned by: Jos
Milestone: Component: Au3Check
Version: Severity: None
Keywords: Cc:


I searched for this issue, but I couldn't find it - even though I've seen it forever.

The Call documentation makes it clear that Call-ing an undefined function is not a critical (exiting) condition, and not necessarily an coding mistake.

However, when using a literal string for the function name, the Au3Check message implies that it is an coding mistake instead of taking into account that it is a valid operation to acquire the @error/@extended values for in-script handling.

The Call example avoids the issue at hand by using a variable to bypass/workaround Au3Check's conditions.

A modification of the example will prompt the Au3Check Error:

If @error = 0xDEAD And @extended = 0xBEEF Then MsgBox(4096, "", "Function does not exist.")

Aside from the actual report, my suggestions toward this specific issue which you can ignore at-will are:

  • Possibly change ERROR to WARNING to reflect the noncritical nature of the condition.
  • Failing that, Document the preference [in a sentence] for function variable/expression passing to evade Au3Check. (like the example shows) However, to me, it gets silly when you have to add extra code to an already-working script to bypass a message from the code-checker.

Maybe this is a non-issue, but I just think it misrepresents the Call function. I always thought (perhaps incorrectly) that Au3Check should anticipate AutoIt for ERRORs and give anything else helpful as WARNINGs, this seems to diverge from that a bit.

Attachments (0)

Change History (3)

comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by Jpm

I think Au3Check try to find real error.
If you really need such coding just use #ignorefunc DoesNotExist

$DoesNotExist ='DoesNotExist'
If @error = 0xDEAD And @extended = 0xBEEF Then MsgBox(4096, "", "Function does not exist.")

this coding reflect more why checking @error/@extended can be useful

comment:2 Changed 14 years ago by anonymous

I'm aware you can use rules to avoid the error, I just think ERRORing by-default on valid code is the mistake.

Au3Check assumes the code is an ERROR when it is valid AutoIt code. Since you're predicting a *possible* mistake it should be a WARNING. (like with other messages)

But this isn't a terribly important issue, so I'm not really insisting on anything if doing otherwise proves unreasonable.

At least in my mind there's no reason to prefer the variable over the literal for ERROR-checking.

In practice though you can use the variable, but there can be conditions where it is not more compact to use a variable for each Call. (eg: checking several functions of the same utility with a unique number of arguments - it is more compact to Call the literal than to set the value to a variable for each Call)

PS: weird, tried to comment but it didn't append it.

comment:3 Changed 13 years ago by Valik

  • Resolution set to No Bug
  • Status changed from new to closed

In my opinion, the code is questionable to begin with so I don't have a problem with an error being reported. I can think of very few circumstances where you would perform a Call() on a literal string where the function won't exist.

Guidelines for posting comments:

  • You cannot re-open a ticket but you may still leave a comment if you have additional information to add.
  • In-depth discussions should take place on the forum.

For more information see the full version of the ticket guidelines here.

Add Comment

Modify Ticket

as closed The owner will remain Jos.

E-mail address and user name can be saved in the Preferences.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.