[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference iosg::all-in-1

Title:ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference
Notice:Please spell ALL-IN-1 correctly - all CAPITALS!
Moderator:IOSG::PYECE
Created:Fri Jul 01 1994
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2716
Total number of notes:12169

2633.0. "%OA-W-SCPNOBLOCKEXIT" by ALFSS2::BEKELE_D (When indoubt THINK!) Fri Apr 18 1997 18:03

    Hello!
    
    I suspect %OA-W-SCPNOBLOCKEXIT means .IF statement with no 
    corresponding .ENDIF.  I could not find it in the message
    file.  The same code that ran under V3.0A is now failing 
    with above error under V3.2.  
    
    Would someone please confirm?
    
    Thanks!
    Dan
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name		DateLines
2633.1.EXIT or .ABORT called from within a structured blockIOSG::NEWLANDRichard Newland, IOSG, REO2-F/J9Fri Apr 18 1997 18:1510
The .MSG source file defines the message as:

    SCPNOBLOCKEXIT  <.EXIT or .ABORT called from within a structured block>


This means that you are trying to leave a block of structured code, which 
you are not allowed to do.


Richard
2633.2IOSG::MAURICEBack in the eggMon Apr 21 1997 07:5610
    Hi,
    
    Though you say the code ran under V3.0A, it can not have worked. Most
    likely is that the .IF statement is catching an error condition that
    has never occurred, so that the code after the .IF has never been
    excecuted - or tested!
    
    Cheers
    
    Stuart
2633.3This should go under the "wild request" catagory but it came from the customerALFSS2::BEKELE_DWhen indoubt THINK!Wed May 07 1997 21:1118
    Hi Stuart!

    This customer has come back and is asking for documented advisory 
on how CM has been tightened against sloppy code or those that are known
to us.  In addition to this case of improper attempt to jump out of a 
structured block, I can only think of such constructs as not having enough 
.ENDIF in nested .IF statements or the change in the behaviour of .TEXT 
directive in various versions of ALL-IN-1.  This customer has many sites 
as well as large amount of customized code and that they are holding out 
on rolling out their upgrades unless they have modified their code that 
is no longer ignored by ALL-IN-1.  

    Is there a more complete list that we can give to the customer?

    Thanks!
    Dan
2633.4IOSG::MAURICEBack in the eggThu May 08 1997 10:2010
    Hi,
    
    Sorry but there is no such list that I am aware of. The main other
    change I remember was that the TXL compiler now catches lines in
    scripts and boilerplates that are too long. This used to lead to
    situations where uncompiled scripts worked, and compiled ones didn't.
    
    Cheers
    
    Stuart