This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: new parser: error recovery needs work
On 17-Jan-2003, Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> wrote:
> Fergus Henderson wrote:-
>
> > We've discussed this before. The concensus last time (as I understood it)
> > was that alphanumeric message codes where a better alternative to message
> > numbers. Message codes are easier to remember, more self-documenting,
> > and avoid collisions between new warnings added on different CVS branches
> > or in different repositories.
>
> I take it the idea is that the message code is similar to the text?
Not really. The message code is a name for the message.
Usually it should be a lot shorter than the message.
Unlike the message, it does not contain any varying parts.
> Then how do we handle internationalization, where users in a different
> language have never even seen, let alone understand, the English form of
> the message?
If you really want to internationalize these, I suppose it would be
possible to provide translations. However, I wouldn't recommend it.
These names will be used in compiler input (compiler options and
source code pragmas), and internationalization doesn't work as well
for input as it does for output.
It would also be possible to provide a version of the C programming
language which accepted internationalized version of keywords in its
input. However, I wouldn't recommend that either ;-)
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.