Related articles |
---|
[2 earlier articles] |
Re: Semantic error recovery mauney@adm.csc.ncsu.edu (1993-11-10) |
Re: Semantic error recovery wjw@eb.ele.tue.nl (1993-11-11) |
Re: Semantic error recovery sasghm@unx.sas.com (1993-11-11) |
Re: Semantic error recovery strohm@mksol.dseg.ti.com (1993-11-12) |
Re: Semantic error recovery olsen@verdix.com (1993-11-12) |
Re: Semantic error recovery enedervo@adobe.com (1993-11-12) |
Re: Semantic error recovery kanze@us-es.sel.de (James Kanze) (1993-11-15) |
Re: Semantic error recovery kanze@us-es.sel.de (James Kanze) (1993-11-15) |
Re: Semantic error recovery delano@snake.CS.Berkeley.EDU (1993-11-17) |
Re: Semantic error recovery bill@amber.csd.harris.com (1993-11-17) |
Re: Semantic error recovery weberwu@inf.fu-berlin.de (1993-11-18) |
Re: Semantic error recovery bj@hatch.socal.com (1993-11-22) |
Re: Semantic error recovery sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com (1993-11-23) |
[3 later articles] |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | James Kanze <kanze@us-es.sel.de> |
Keywords: | errors, parse |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 93-11-023 93-11-078 |
Date: | Mon, 15 Nov 1993 12:19:37 GMT |
The moderator writes:
|> How many people find it useful for a compiler to chug through and try
|> to parse and diagnose an entire file in the presence of errors? I'm
|> just as happy with one that finds a few errors and gives up so I can
|> go fix them.
I suspect that this depends on how well the compiler is on recovering from
the first error. At present, I just fix the first and recompile, too.
But the main reason for this is that 90% (or more) of the following errors
are knock-ons. I would far prefer fixing all of the errors at once, given
a compiler that recovered sensibly.
--
James Kanze email: kanze@us-es.sel.de
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue du Faisan, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.