Vista - Turning on options explicit

I've inherited a several thousand line vbs script. Options Explicit is
commented out in it. I've found one mistyped variable and I'm sure there are
more. Is there a way to uncomment it and do a syntax check on the code? So
far I can just get it to point out undeclared variables when it hits them
during execution.

Brian

BrianB wrote:hi Brian, unfortunately, that's the way it works.

Even visual basic (classic) will let you type in anything,
and not catch it until it executes. (Not experienced with
vb.net).

I have one suggestion, not easy, but with "thousands of
lines of code", the extra effort may be worth it.

Here goes: get yourself an programmer's editor with syntax
highlighting, which allows for you to input the language
syntax. (For example, scintilla, or EditPlus). It will
most likely come with a vbs syntax file (or at least a
visual basic syntax file). The syntax file will come with
lists of language verbs (do, stop, etc), and will include
instructions for "colorizing" various language elements
(strings, constants).

What I suggest is to set up another category, lets call it
"declared variables". In this category you place all
the variable names that are dimensioned (i.e., declared).
You also set up your colorization rules to highlight the
declared variables. This leaves the UN-colorized variables
as un-declared (note that the language elements are generally
colorized).

This sounds like a sure way to get eye-strain, looking for
un-colorized variables. But if you set the default color
to something noticeable then that might make the un-declared
variables stand out more.

cheers, jw
____________________________________________________________

You got questions? WE GOT ANSWERS!!! ..(but, no guarantee
the answers will be applicable to the questions)

p.s. you might wish to first check with some of the "high
priced" editors (like Sapien PrimalScript) to see if they
will auto-magically detect any undeclared variables
(without going into execution).

In article <e2ng$AATJHA.4456@xxxxxx>,
kindlyReplyToNewsgroup@xxxxxx says...If you set "Option Explicit" (which is not the default, AFAIK), VB
classic will catch undeclared variables at compile time, rather than
waiting until runtime.

I wonder if importing his big vbscript into a VB IDE might compile well
enough to catch the undeclared var's?

.....

--
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML
/ \ Email!

Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

"David Kerber" <ns_dkerber@xxxxxx_WarrenRogersAssociates.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2390cd92b60c033b989cce@xxxxxxIt's OK for VB6 for sure and I use VBA editor to prototype Scripts as
well....

"MikeB" <m.byerleyATVerizonDottieNettie> wrote in message
news:%23Z1n2GCTJHA.1160@xxxxxxThank you all. I'll give it a try.

Brian

>WEB-ED Editor
www.jsware.net/jsware/webed.php5

Colorizes declared variables automatically.

"ekkehard.horner" <ekkehard.horner@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4927477e$0$30236$9b4e6d93@xxxxxx-online.net...To gain confidence in the script, you will have to eventually *understand*
it, as well.

mayayana suggested that the WEB-ED editor could help you differentiate
between declared and undeclared variables. That might be of great help in
the task. But if the missing declarations hide some logical error, I do not
think you can expect a tool to automatically correct it.

/Al

Il giorno Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:30:39 -0700, "Al Dunbar" <alandrub@xxxxxx> ha scritto:I read (23 years ago) of a program for the Commodore 64 which parsed the code and built a
cross reference of the variables and the lines where they were used.
If a variable is used only once then there should be an error.
Anyone willing to enjoy writing this for vbscript?

--
Giovanni Cenati (Bergamo, Italy)
Write to "Reventlov" at katamail com
http://digilander.libero.it/Cenati (Esempi e programmi in VbScript)
--

code and built aI've never seen or written a VBScript that needed such
an elaborate tool. Just running it and checking error line
numbers seems to work fine for me. Maybe others have a
different way of doing things. For myself, I find that the *really*
hard part is familiarizing myself with the code. For that,
color syntax highlighting is very helpful, but I still have to
work out the logic. Until I have the whole layout and
functionality of a script clear in my mind -- whether it's my
code or someone else's -- I can't do much of anything useful
with it.

"mayayana" <mayaXXyana@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:epS7vwjUJHA.1164@xxxxxxThat would, indeed, seem to indicate a logic error of some kind, however
simply knowing this will still require the scripter to determine the cause
of the problem: was a variable name spelt incorrectly, for example? But this
will only flag those errors where the incorrect spelling of one variable is
*not* the same as the correct spelling of another - an error that is often
more difficult to deal with.

Another way this can happen is when chunks of code are deleted...

There are so many other possible logic errors that cannot be found through
mechanical means, that such a limited tool would not seem to me to be worth
the cost to develop.

But, all this said, having a single instance of one variable name may not
always be an error. Consider that the variable might be defined in a script
snippet instantiated in code generated dynamically with EXECUTEGLOBAL.
Colorizing editors are useful, but if one also writes one's code using an
editor having intellisense capabilities, that is likely to prevent some
errors up front, as it will be aware of the number and names of parameters
in function calls, and possibly match code block elements. That, along with
adopting a consistent approach to coding standards wil, I think, get one
much farther along than any single-function code analysis tool will be able
to.

/Al