On 9/24/2013 10:54 PM, "Luís Marques" <[email protected]>" wrote:
Walter, I'm sorry to hear your frustration on this issue of the error caret, and
the lack of recognition you got for your dmc implementation of that concept.
For what it's worth the following is my opinion:
- I think I first met an error caret in the javac compiler, around 2000. I found
it very nice and useful. My positive experience was not preceded by any
"marketing" of that feature, so I think we can conclude that my enjoyment was
genuine.
- When clang added nice error diagnostics in general (compared to GCC at the
time) and the caret in particular that helped shape my perception of that
compiler in a positive light, whatever the actual technical merits of that
compiler may be.
- In general I think dmd is quite a good compiler but I regularly mumble to
myself "hmm, the compiler could have provided better diagnostics for this error
I committed". I can start compiling a list of those errors with less than great
error messages, if that's useful.
Yes, it is useful. Please do so, and add them to bugzilla.
- Based on my experience with javac and clang, providing a caret (and ranges
around the offending expressions, as in clang) is very useful *to me*, and I
would be very pleased to see them on the D compilers, even if that information
was not present in the debugger, so as not to regress compiler performance.
Thank you for a very reasonable reply.
