public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/95725] Confusing error diagnostic in an invalid template
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 11:26:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-95725-4-dCDSUotj7y@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-95725-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95725

--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Haoxin Tu from comment #6)
> Hi, there.
> 
> I hold the view that the compiler should have good fault tolerance, which
> means giving an input(even invalid), the compiler might emit appropriate
> error message diagnostics so that we can fix them into valid code according
> to the diagnostics. 

In an ideal world, yes. But this testcase is complete garbage. Nobody is going
to accidentally write that and be unable to see what's wrong with the code when
they get an error.

We could spend time giving perfect diagnostics for unrealistic garbage, or do
more useful things.

> I have tested in both GCC and Clang, the results show that GCC has lots of
> unrelated diagnostic messages than Clang. 

They're not unrelated, they're all directly related to the error in the code.

> In this report, GCC-trunk seems ok, but GCC-9 emits too many duplicated
> error messages. So I guess there might something not correct in FE.

So it's already fixed then.

> Finally, I am wondering if those cases are useful for the GCC community?

This particular case is not useful.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-06-18 11:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-17 17:02 [Bug c++/95725] New: " haoxintu at gmail dot com
2020-06-17 17:43 ` [Bug c++/95725] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-17 17:49 ` haoxintu at gmail dot com
2020-06-17 18:58 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-17 23:49 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-17 23:57 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-18  1:51 ` haoxintu at gmail dot com
2020-06-18  6:23 ` haoxintu at gmail dot com
2020-06-18  8:34 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-18 11:26 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2020-06-18 11:31 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-09  9:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-95725-4-dCDSUotj7y@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).