On Saturday, 4 October 2014 at 04:26:45 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sat, 04 Oct 2014 04:10:49 +0000
eles via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Where's the contradiction? The compilers state hasn't been
>> corrupted just because it encounters errors in the text
>> file.
> but compiler is in unknown state.
It's not. It just detected that another system would enter in
an unknown state if built. The compiler is like the engineer
that examines the design of a project and discovers an error
on it, so it refuses to build the product. Is the engineer in
an unknown state?
sorry. i meant that compiler WILL be in unknown state if it will
continute to processing invalid source. that's why it should
stop right
after the first error.
No. It might produce an invalid product. Just like a real
engineer could produce a flawed product on the basis of wrong
designs.
Yes, you might reach a state where you are no longer be able to
continue because physically impossible. "Build a round square".
Both the engineer and the compiler will bark when they see this.
Guessing might not be good, but it is nice effort to do. Do
you really miss the super-cryptic C (let's not even talk about
C++) error messages that you sometimes receive?
yes. DMD attempts to 'guess' what identifier i mistyped drives
me
crazy. just shut up and stop after "unknown identifier", you
robot,
don't try to show me your artificial idiocity!
Could we add a flag to the compiler for that?
-cassandramode=[yes/no/whatever]
Joke :)
Anyway, the Cassandra name for the compiler is just perfect: it
might be right, but you won't believe!
