Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register. Apr 5th, 2018, 11:53pm
ATTENTION MEMBERS: Conforums will be closing it doors and discontinuing its service on April 15, 2018. Ad-Free has been deactivated. Outstanding Ad-Free credits will be reimbursed to respective payment methods.
If you require a dump of the post on your message board, please come to the support board and request it.
Why did you not change the code yourself when you spotted the error?
Quite simple - it didn't look anything like an 'error' to me. The indications were that the buffer pointer Buf% had quite deliberately been made a global: it was omitted from the list of LOCALs, and named according to the preferred convention for global variables (an initial capital and the rest lowercase). By contrast, the LOCAL integer variables were all 'static' - A% to Z%.
So the evidence pointed to it being a deliberate design decision to make the buffer pointer a global. In that case it would have been quite inappropriate to alter the article without first checking with the author.
I do commonly edit other people's Wiki articles to correct errors - when I'm certain it is an error; but I wasn't certain in this case. As it turns out it seems it really was just a mistake (but I still don't understand why the variable is named Buf% rather than B%).
(but I still don't understand why the variable is named Buf% rather than B%).
Don't worry, neither do I It's probably the result of putting together the code on two seperate occasions, and cut&pasting working code into the library code rather than retyping it (which probably explains the missing LOCAL). I may get around to changing it to B%, "Buf%" is not my usual nomenclature style anyway (I would usually use all lower case, or something more name descriptive).
Logged
It's probably the result of putting together the code on two seperate occasions, and cut&pasting working code into the library code rather than retyping it (which probably explains the missing LOCAL).