Not allow “do;“

[Kraig]

Interesting, thanks I’ll look

[Kays]

I just spent a lot of time […] I’d like to suggest that putting a semicolon after do should generate a compile error […]

Yeah, PEBCAK. There are many code samples that may have limited usefulness, but are allowed and syntactically correct, examples:

Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]

1. ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;       { extraneous empty statements }
2. ++-+-+---+-+----+-+-42 { superfluous unary operators }
3. @myPointerVariable^    { instead of _just_ `myPointerVariable` }

Still I disapprove emission of warnings in such cases: It adds complexity to the compiler at minimal benefit. On top of that it’s difficult to formally codify the threshold that something deserves a warning.

[Martin_fr]

There are many code samples that may have limited usefulness, but are allowed and syntactically correct, examples:

Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]

1. ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;       { extraneous empty statements }
2. ++-+-+---+-+----+-+-42 { superfluous unary operators }

And that means that this is valid code:

Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]

1. while ++i < c do ;