Syntax Checker that's better than the normal syntax checker
 

I've been using the stupid built in syntax checker, it's been making
some mistakes is there any better syntax checker. Unrealistically, a
standalone application were you paste in your code and it checks it. But
anything other than the built in syntax checker will do.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Re: Syntax Checker that's better than the normal syntax checker
 

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008, Jacob Grover wrote:
> I've been using the stupid built in syntax checker, it's been making
> some mistakes is there any better syntax checker. Unrealistically, a
> standalone application were you paste in your code and it checks it. But
> anything other than the built in syntax checker will do.

Uh... what?

If the built-in syntax checker isn't catching an error... it's not an
error. The "built-in syntax checker" is the interpreter itself.

Unless you're talking about an IDE or something, in which case you
should probably tell us what you mean...

Ben

Re: Syntax Checker that's better than the normal syntax checker
 

Ben Bleything wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008, Jacob Grover wrote:
>> I've been using the stupid built in syntax checker, it's been making
>> some mistakes is there any better syntax checker. Unrealistically, a
>> standalone application were you paste in your code and it checks it. But
>> anything other than the built in syntax checker will do.
>
> Uh... what?
>
> If the built-in syntax checker isn't catching an error... it's not an
> error. The "built-in syntax checker" is the interpreter itself.
>
> Unless you're talking about an IDE or something, in which case you
> should probably tell us what you mean...
>
> Ben

Maybe he's referring to ruby -c ?

--
vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407

Re: Syntax Checker that's better than the normal syntax checker
 

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> Maybe he's referring to ruby -c ?

Ah, that's a good point. And further perhaps he means "gives better
error messages", since we've probably all felt the pain of ruby -c
telling us that there's a syntax error on the last (blank) line of the
file.

Ben

Re: Syntax Checker that's better than the normal syntax checker
 

> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> Maybe he's referring to ruby -c ?

ruby -cw surely!

Ruby's error messages are horribly obscure compared with Perl's, which
are really quite friendly. A typical one would be something like "(Blah
blah blah) error. Maybe an unterminated string starting on line 42?" --
which it usually is. Or "Class Thing not found. Maybe you forgot to
include Thing.pm?" -- which is usually the case.

Dave
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Re: Syntax Checker that's better than the normal syntax chec
 

Dave Bass wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
>> Maybe he's referring to ruby -c ?
>
> ruby -cw surely!
>
> Ruby's error messages are horribly obscure compared with Perl's, which
> are really quite friendly. A typical one would be something like "(Blah
> blah blah) error. Maybe an unterminated string starting on line 42?" --
> which it usually is. Or "Class Thing not found. Maybe you forgot to
> include Thing.pm?" -- which is usually the case.
>
> Dave
Cool, now I can use it because I would look for an endless string or too
little or too many ends and so on.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.