Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!lll-lcc!ptsfa!well!itivax!umich!jtr485
From: jtr485@umich.UUCP (Johnathan Tainter)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Check the Arg Count
Message-ID: <24@umich.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Jan-87 21:45:23 EST
Article-I.D.: umich.24
Posted: Mon Jan 19 21:45:23 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 22-Jan-87 00:15:03 EST
References: <3226@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <1635@enea.UUCP> <745@drivax.UUCP> <492@gec-mi-at.co.uk>
Organization: EECS, University of Michigan
Lines: 25

In article <492@gec-mi-at.co.uk>, adam@miduet.UUCP writes:
> In article <745@drivax.UUCP> holloway@drivax.UUCP (Bruce Holloway) writes:
>>Pascal puts in a lot of code for array overruns,etc., that are unnecessary for
>>a well-designed program. You could turn all this off on the Pascal I learned
>>on, which made it tolerable. But I don't want anything in the program I didn't
>>put there -- if I'd wanted subscript checking, I would have added it.
> Turning off compiler checking after the program is debugged is like 
> throwing away your lifeboats after the maiden voyage.
> 	-Adam.
Bruce never said anything about debugging the program.  He said well designed.
The verb 'debug' does not really have a past tense as it is never possible to 
be sure you are done.

Of course, if Bruce really doesn't want anything in the code he didn't put there
then he really ought to be programming in assembler.

The pascal(*) I program in on a regular basis allows you to turn this off for
selective portions of the code.  I use this quite often to reduce the
space and improve performance of the code.  However, I have to thoroughly
convince myself that this bit of optimization is safe before doing it.

--j.a.tainter

*UCSD Pascal is one of the best pascal supersets around, the only serious flaw
is 16 bit pointers