Tom Tromey wrote:
Aldy> Are there any thoughts on this (the PRs, the caret diagnostics, plan of
Aldy> attack, etc?).
Caret diagnostics do seem like the way to go.
Yes, I've advocated that for years. People consistently tell me that
EDG's diagnostics are superior to GCC, in part because of EDG's use of
carets. As far as I know, EDG does not have the capability to show
preprocessed source (as Joseph suggests), but I agree that this would be
a useful capability.
I suspect that even without fully accurate token information from the
parsers, caret diagnostics would be an improvement. Some of these
problems that we consistently struggle with (printing complex
expressions, using the same spellings of keywords and types that the
user did, etc.) would be significantly improved by using carets -- even
if the carets didn't point in exactly the right place.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
