by "Sven Pran" <no.direct@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sep 10, 2007 at 11:39 AM
"news.ntlworld.com" <uk_letter_writer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Yg4Fi.7103$gA6.1709@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>i haven't ignored any of you - i tried version 5.5 and the syntax of the
>language has changed between version 4 and 5.5 - i admit 4.5 must have
been
>a mistake as you all say 4.5 didn't exist but it was definitely 4...
>
> i have loaded the code in and even simple lines, for instance after
> defining "function colour(colourparam :byte) :byte;" which the compiler
> p***** perfectly it fails in the implementation stage at:
>
> function colour(colourparam :byte); <- it says it expects a : instead of
> the ;
I haven't followed this thread, but here I have a comment:
There are two possible reasons why code that compiled successfully by
one compiler version will not compile by a later version:
1: The compiler options parameter settings are different.
2: The later version is less tolerant than the earlier version on
technical
errors in the source.
The code text: "function colour(colourparam :byte);" looks like such an
error, it should never have been accepted but may have passed through
undetected by earlier versions of the compiler.
regards Sven
