'Use of real types can result in precision problems'

[Durval]

When trying to edit, in AC9, an object created by AC7, I get the message on the title of this post when the 'Check Script' button is pressed. I haven't changed anything in the scripts yet.
The line where the warning points to have IF statements like these:
IF B=0 THEN ....
IF anyparameter<>0 THEN...
Despite the warnings, the object seems to work perfectly.
What 'real types' is AC talking about??

[Durval]

Olivier wrote:
Let's take this example about text position (old GV's names to make short).

IF (W~ > 90 AND W~ <= 270) THEN ROT2 180 ELSE ROT2 0
Currently, this script works, with some weaks for limt values, and i understand now, why.
Thanks to all the programmers for their explanations.

According to the new rules, i should write, if i understand correctly
eps=0.0001
IF (ABS(W~ -90) > eps AND ABS(W~ -270) <= eps) THEN ROT2 180 ELSE ROT2 0
it does'nt work.

If i write
IF ((W~ -90) > eps AND (W~ -270) <= eps) THEN ROT2 180 ELSE ROT2 0
this statement works perfectly.

None of your examples would trigger the warning.
By the way, Karl, '>='s and '<='s also do not trigger them.

[James Murray]

It seems with a recent (2045?) update, actual precision problems have arisen where there were harmless warnings before.

I had several windows suddenly start failing to generate with 'incompatible types of expression' errors in the report. I opened them to check for errors, and the only errors were 'UORTCRIPP's.

I fixed them and the windows were fine. I have been selectively ignoring those warnings, but I'm stopping as of now.

[Anonymous]

Durval wrote:

Olivier wrote:
Let's take this example about text position (old GV's names to make short).

Hi Durval,

You force me to work on the national day, here, what a pity.
Well, before a "non sleeping night", if i can clarify some points.

Thanks to the help of many contributors on this forum, and specially Oleg's help, i solved most of these problems.
I must admit that for ">= & <=" equalities, sometime i still get some weird results.
With the quoted example, sometime i can't get correct results (for limit values), anything i try. No more with GS examples.
I don't have the truth, so, for such particular situations, i add a parameter allowing the user to correct this manually.

[JGoode]

I can't believe this is still an issue 14 years later.
Any way to turn off this particular error message yet?