Hey everybody,
> I'm not really because I program mainly in C++, and my experience demonstrates
> that after the first error it is not uncommon to have the compiler completely
> lost. Thus I know this will be a very complex task, and I'm not sure it can be
> done.
After your posts I made a small experiment with Eclipse and you are
right, even with the following small example the compiler gave two
wrong error messages:
=== example:
public class test_me {
public static void main(String args[]) {
int birgi = 0;
int damla = 1;
System.out.println(birgi+damla);
for(;;)
=== javac output:
test_me.java:8: illegal start of expression
^
test_me.java:7: ';' expected
for(;;)
^
2 errors
*However* Eclipse could figure out one of the missing brackets and
highlighted the corresponding single bracket. It also failed about
finding the second missing bracket and highlighted the second semi-
colon in the for.
Basically this proves that directly parsing the compiler output will
not give very accurate results, especially when the code has some
syntax errors.
Maybe(!?!?) we can overcome this problem by a kind of multi-step code
checking. First step looks for syntax errors, and second step looks
for compile-time errors that are not syntactic. We may be able to
filter the output of the second step according to the results of the
first step???
Birgi
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
