Well, it's nice to see we are now in agreement in most areas. BTW, in case there is any remaining doubt, let me make it clear that I have never myself regarded a program without a parameter list as "pointless". I'm glad you liked those ISO-10206 citations, too. Even if you want to limit yourself to ISO-7185, the EP standard is still a useful guide to the interpretation of ISO-7185, since it builds directly upon this, but takes a broader view of the application of Pascal in the real world. You are correct that ISO-7185 only defines ONE mechanism by which program variables can be bound to external entities - via the program parameter list! Any other mechanism, which may be employed by a particular implementation, is a non-standard extension (well, by definition, all extensions are non-standard;-)! Joe.

-----Original Message----- From: J. David Bryan [SMTP:dbryan@bcpl.net] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 2:01 AM To: GNU Pascal List Subject: Re: Errors and Standards (was: compiler bug)

On 23 Oct 2001, at 11:44, da Silva, Joe wrote:

...

Sorry if I wasn't clear ... when I said "my understanding is ...", what this meant (and BTW, I thought this would be clear from the subject being discussed) was "my understanding of the standard(s) is ...".

I understood what your understanding was. ;-) My assertion is that understandings of the standard don't count, only statements from the standard do.

...

So, if you have specific areas where you believe that I have contradicted the standard(s), please indicate the particulars, so we can both double-check it.

I can't, because I believe that you have asserted a restriction that is not in the standard (but see my comment about "the standard" below). I can't cite a passage from the standard that specifically allows linking of non- program-parameter, main-block variables to external entities, because the standard says nothing about such linking (allowed or disallowed). Can you

cite a passage that disallows such use?

...

BTW, you should note that we are in agreement that a program without a parameter list is perfectly legal.

Duly noted! ;-)

...

As to whether such a program is "pointless", please note that any such inference (which arose when I semi-quoted Peter Grogono), was nothing more than a bit of humour.

The issue for me is not whether certain programs are or are not pointless.

My contention is broader, specifically, that any such assertion must be supported by the standard and not simply by "common sense." The Pascal standards are written in horribly arcane language to ensure that they are not open to such interpretations, i.e., that everything stated is unambiguous. We shouldn't have to argue about whether a given program is or is not legal (or pointless), because the standard should either prohibit it or not.

Given the choice, I would much rather decide things on the basis of opinions and common sense, as reading the standards always gives me a severe headache. But I believe that we cannot do that, if GPC is to claim

adherence to those standards. If there is disagreement over positions that GPC should take, then the choice of position must be the one that is supported by citations from the standards.

...

Now, specific to your situation, a very quick check of the ISO-10206 standard revealed the following...

Ah, but the assertion regarding "pointlessness" (i.e., that a program without program parameters could have no side effects) was made in the context of ISO 7185. Frank allowed that ISO 10206 programs could have side effects without program parameters (and is supported by the passages you cite).

I concur completely with your citations in the context of ISO 10206.

However, ISO 7185 mentions binding to external entities only with reference to program parameters (section 6.10). I contend that 6.10 applies only to

main block variables that are also program parameters and therefore is not

applicable to (and therefore does not restrict) other main block variables

being bound by some other mechanism external to the language.

-- Dave