[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.5 |---
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.4 |9.5 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener --- GCC 9.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 9.5.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.3 |9.4 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 9.3.0 has been released, adjusting target milestone.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.2 |9.3 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 9.2 has been released.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|9.0 |9.2 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- GCC 9.1 has been released.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager --- ASSIGNED because it already has an assignee.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ";"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |9.0
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic --- Comment #1 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 15:44:21 UTC --- Originally from: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8205858/clang-vs-gcc-for-linux-development-compare-and-contrast
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2013-01-23
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23
16:25:18 UTC ---
This reduces to:
struct ostream { };
struct A {
int i;
}
ostream operator(ostream o, const A) { return o; }
int main()
{
A a;
ostream o;
o a;
}
which still gives a poor error that doesn't identify the problem, but it
doesn't give pages of errors because there is only one operator in scope
x.cc:7:8: error: expected initializer before '' token
ostream operator(ostream o, const A) { return o; }
^
x.cc: In function 'int main()':
x.cc:13:7: error: no match for 'operator' (operand types are 'ostream' and
'A')
o a;
^
(Separately, I'm investigating whether there's some way to reduce the output
when an invalid ostream operation is done, because the sheer number of
overloads of operator causes pages of output due to G++'s verbose, and
usually very useful, output describing argument deduction errors.)
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 --- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 17:02:02 UTC --- (Separately, I'm investigating whether there's some way to reduce the output when an invalid ostream operation is done, because the sheer number of overloads of operator causes pages of output due to G++'s verbose, and usually very useful, output describing argument deduction errors.) One clear way is to avoid the repetition of: In file included from /home/manuel/test1/195333M/install/include/c++/4.8.0/iostream:40:0, from test.cc:2: Another is to add a foverload-candidates-limit option like ftemplate-backtrace-limit, so if there are more than the limit (let's say 5), the output is elided in a similar fashion. Another suggestion is to don't show the full function declaration like in: In file included from /home/manuel/test1/195333M/install/include/c++/4.8.0/iostream:40:0, from test.cc:2: /home/manuel/test1/195333M/install/include/c++/4.8.0/ostream:532:5: note: templateclass _Traits std::basic_ostreamchar, _Traits std::operator(std::basic_ostreamchar, _Traits, const char*) operator(basic_ostreamchar, _Traits __out, const char* __s) ^ /home/manuel/test1/195333M/install/include/c++/4.8.0/ostream:532:5: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed: test.cc:16:16: note: cannot convert ‘me’ (type ‘Student’) to type ‘const char*’ std::cout me \n; ^ where clang says in 1 line: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.4/../../../../include/c++/4.4/bits/ostream.tcc:320:5: note: candidate function [with _CharT = char, _Traits = std::char_traitschar] not viable: no known conversion from 'Student' to 'const char *' for 2nd argument operator(basic_ostream_CharT, _Traits __out, const char* __s)
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 --- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 17:05:14 UTC --- BTW, what is the difference between deduction and substitution?
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 --- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 17:10:58 UTC --- Of course, the color output makes much easier to spot the note:. And the use of a common prefix note: candidate function... or note: candidate template... also makes easier to spot the start of each individual explanation.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 --- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 17:17:53 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) Of course, the color output makes much easier to spot the note:. Er, not here, bold black (the color they chose for note:) on a black background is pretty hard to read... (otherwise I agree that colors help)
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084 --- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23 17:31:21 UTC --- Strange. In the GCC farm and without any customization, clang uses gray for the note. I have seen presentations where it also uses this color scheme. I don't know if they have some brackground-color detection, and it fails in your case.
[Bug c++/56084] poor error recovery for missing ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56084
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-23
17:44:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
BTW, what is the difference between deduction and substitution?
Some template arguments are deduced from the function arguments, and those
arguments are then substituted into the rest of the function template signature
to form a function signature.
e.g.
templatetypename T, typename U=T
void func(T, typename T::iterator)
{ }
If you call 'func(v, v.begin())' then T will be deduced from the type of 'v', U
will be deduced as the same type, then that type will be substituted into the
type T::iterator. If 'v' has no nested 'iterator' type then substitution fails
and so deduction fails, and the template cannot be called.
