On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 11:04:33PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 02:28:58AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 06:25:03PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > > In a sick way I kinda liked how compilers were able to give out error > > > messages not unlike: > > > > > > foo.ada: line 231: Violation of sections 7.8.3, 9.11.5b and 10.0.16: see the LRM. > > > > Ever used the Mac C compiler? > > Yes...? No. But can we make Configure spit out section numbers in C89 every time it finds a non-conformant feature on the platform? [hmm. for things that C99 doesn't break in C89] Nicholas Clark
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloading) Eric Roode
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloading) Dan Sugalski
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloadi... Larry Wall
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overl... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloading) Larry Wall
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloadi... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overl... Simon Cozens
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & O... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying &a... Nicholas Clark
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloading) Eric Roode
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overloadi... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & Overl... Larry Wall
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & O... John Porter
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying &a... Larry Wall
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying & O... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tying &a... Larry Wall
- Re: Flexible parsing (was Tyin... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Flexible parsing (was ... Larry Wall
- Re: Flexible parsing (was ... Dan Sugalski