This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/26058] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] C++ error recovery regression
- From: "sabre at nondot dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 31 May 2006 23:00:04 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/26058] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] C++ error recovery regression
- References: <bug-26058-6809@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #9 from sabre at nondot dot org 2006-05-31 23:00 -------
Right, clearly issuing good diagnostics is a matter of balancing cases against
each other. While I agree that this is valid:
void f() {
void g();
g();
}
I don't see it used very often, particularly not in C++ code (I'm accustomed to
seeing it in pre-ansi C code most of the time). I personally think that
forgetting (or losing track of) the brace occurs more often than the erroneous
version of this, but if you disagree, that's fine and I'll stop bugging you!
-Chris
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26058