[Bug c++/23263] Incomprehensible message for invalid attempt to partially specialize a member

["igodard at pacbell dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Additional Comments From igodard at pacbell dot net  2005-08-08 02:42 -------
See also #23281

Should this and other reports about diagnostic quality be treated as
"enhancement requests"? I suppose tht it depends on what you consider
"correctness". If that means "conforming to standard", then any diagnostic will
do, including "something wrong found somewhere in program". Personally I use a
different standard of "correct", which includes "usable", and so addresses
issues like compilation time measured in days as well as quality of diagnostic.

I understand that the gcc implementation community has a notion of "QOI"
(quality of implementation) which reflects much of what I call "usable". But I
would distinguish a "defect of QOI" from an "enhancement request"; the latter
being something nice to have, but the former impacting real usage.

I put this particular DR in the "defect of QOI" category. Even if you do not,
you probably can select a non-empty set of DRs that are truly "defects" and not
mere "enhancement requests. 

Consequently I'm filing this as a DR against the gcc DR reporting machinery
itself, rather than against the compiler in particular. There needs to be
categories for QOI defects of varying severity; either that, or complaints about
diagnostics and other QOI ussues should not by policy be filed as "enhancement
requests", and forgotten.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23263