On 10/25/10 21:12 CDT, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2010-10-25 21:01:49 -0400, Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com>
said:
bearophile wrote:
Another diagnostic feature is to not just use the caret (we have
discussed about it time ago) but it also underlines the wrong part:
t.c:7:39: error: invalid operands to binary expression ('int' and
'struct A')
return y + func(y ? ((SomeA.X + 40) + SomeA) / 42 + SomeA.X : SomeA.X);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~
Yes, we discussed it before. The Digital Mars C/C++ compiler does
this, and NOBODY CARES.
Not one person in 25 years has ever even commented on it. Nobody
commented on its lack in dmd.
It's a waste of time to implement things nobody cares about.
With the above error message, when you go to the next error within
Xcode, it puts the text insertion caret right where the error caret is.
I've found in the last few months using Clang that this behaviour of
Xcode saves me from hitting a lot the arrow keys when correcting errors
because I'm already closer to where the error happened. That's even more
true when the same error is repeated multiple times and I can machinery
repeat the same fix. I actually miss the feature when I compile
something with GCC using Xcode, because GCC provides only the line
number and all Xcode can do is select the line.
It's true that by itself, on the command line, this feature isn't
terribly useful. But for better integration with Xcode (or any IDE for
that matter), I'd like it very much if dmd printed the column number for
the caret in addition to the line. It's not a very important feature,
but just a "nice touch" that makes things a little better.
This is odd. I'd find if difficult to picture that. So the compiler puts
the cursor exactly where it _thinks_ the error occurred. More often than
not that's not even the locus of the actual error, and even if it were,
I'd find it a stretch to say that that would improve my responsiveness.
Andrei
