On 9/24/2013 3:04 PM, bearophile wrote:
The problem with grepping is that it could lead to mistakes, you have to grep
for the whole error message, otherwise you risk finding the wrong message.
It's hardly a risk. If you get 2 hits, you skip the one that's a mismatch.
Another problem is that the wording could change, both in different versions of
the same compiler and in different compilers, so every compiler needs its own
wiki.
That problem is MUCH WORSE with error numbers. Remember, I have tried it in the
past.
Also, if you need to use a search, you must have all the error messages in
the same page, while with error messages you could just go directly to the page
number and you don't need to copy and paste several (all) the words of the error
message. Having a standard number across all D compilers allows for a
standardization of tools (the IDE has to show the same error tooltips regardless
the D compiler you are using). Another advantage of numbers of error messages is
that if two different points of the same compiler have to generate the same
error, using the same code number there is no risk the error message could go
out of sync to each other. This has happened in DMD, where I have seen the same
error give different error messages with the same dmd
(http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11094 ).
Standardization of error messages, let alone standardization of error message
numbers, is a very bad idea. It presumes all implementations are identical, and
hamstrings attempts at innovation.
What makes me grumpy is people only want these things when some other
compiler does it, sort of a bandwagon thing.
I have tried to show, here and in Issue 5004, that's not true.
I don't believe it, based on plenty of experience with "grass is greener"
compiler ephemera.
