octave-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #46536] bad indexing produces different error


From: Lachlan Andrew
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #46536] bad indexing produces different error message in dev than default
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 03:23:19 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/41.0

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #46536 (project octave):

Yes, the change was intentional.

I'll fix the ';' once I write a patch for a more serious bug.  In dev, it
gives 


octave:1> x.foo = 1:5
octave:2> x.foo(-1)
error: x(-1); subscripts must be either integers 1 to (2^31)-1 or logicals


which omits the ".foo".  That isn't too bad, but if we use "x.foo(n).bar(m)",
it will just say "x(-1)" for either n or m being -1.  Do you have suggestions
on how to handle that?

It seems overkill to re-execute the indexing (which may also give different
results, if ++, or -= were used).  Would it be better to revert to a generic
message in those cases?

For the x.foo(-1) case, would it be better to trace one level down in the
execution, or perhaps report  x.<...>(-1)?

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?46536>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]