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 16-Jan-2003, Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 02:11:05PM -0500, Phil Edwards wrote:
> > You really don't want to rely on the text of an error message not changing
> > over time. For this kind of thing to work, we need error messages to have
> > numbers (like every other compiler does, and with reason).
>
> Oooh, and with message numbers it's possible to add options to enable
> or disable individual warnings.
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.
IIRC there was significant opposition to message numbers, because they
are too cryptic and because of the problem with collisions, but I don't
recall anyone objecting to alphanumeric message codes.
--
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.