Odd structure "bug"

a_riot42

I noticed the other day that the compiler doesn't care if you declare a structure type without defining it. In define_variable you can put:

volatile _Fubar fubar

and even though there is no _Fubar in define_type, the compiler doesn't care. Rather odd.
Paul

jdonachiue@shaw.ca

I talked to Mark Gillner, AMX Canada Trainer, and he figures the compiler will
simply ignore fubar and _Fubar will be an Integer.

volatile _Fubar fubar
compiler interprets to
VOLATILE Integer _Fubar;

Joe Hebert

a_riot42 wrote: »

I noticed the other day that the compiler doesn't care if you declare a structure type without defining it. In define_variable you can put:

volatile _Fubar fubar

and even though there is no _Fubar in define_type, the compiler doesn't care. Rather odd.
Paul

There is no structure type involved here.

jdonachiue@shaw.ca wrote: »

I talked to Mark Gillner, AMX Canada Trainer, and he figures the compiler will
simply ignore fubar and _Fubar will be an Integer.

volatile _Fubar fubar
compiler interprets to
VOLATILE Integer _Fubar;

I don't think that is true.

I think the compiler will see _Fubar as a VOLATILE INTEGER
and
the compiler will see fubar as a NON_VOLATILE INTEGER

Edit:

To further clarify

DEFINE_VARIABLE

volatile _Fubar fubar

Will be seen as:

DEFINE_VARIABLE

volatile _Fubar	// defaults to INTEGER
fubar			// defaults to NON_VOLATILE INTEGER

a_riot42

Yes the compiler must see it as an integer. Without the structure in define_type it has no way of knowing you are trying to declare a structure rather than a default integer. I had a typo in my structure declaration and was surprised that the compiler didn't complain, but what you say makes perfect sense.
Paul

jdonachiue@shaw.ca

Ah yes, that makes perfect sense.

DEFINE_VARIABLE
volatile _Fubar // defaults to INTEGER
fubar // defaults to NON_VOLATILE INTEGER

Thank you for the clarification.