Re: [patch][RFC] bail out after front-end errors

[Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>]

Hi,
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Steven Bosscher<stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This patch is one way to address PR44982. I see no good reason to
>> cgraph_finalize_compilation_unit if there were parse errors. As Richi
>> already pointed out, GCC traditionally has proceeded after parse
>> errors to preserve warnings and errors we generate from the middle-end
>> and during semantic analysis. But it seems to me that those warnings
>> are not very meaningful after parse errors (-Wuninitialized after a
>> parse error??), and errors from the middle end are mostly for exotic
>> code (involving asm()s and the like). Bailing out after parse errors
>> is therefore IMHO the right thing to do for the common case.
>>
>> Thoughts? Comments?
> Conceptually it makes sense.  Did you check whether allowing the
> FE too proceed to final_write_globals but stop before
> cgraph_finalize_compilation_unit
> preserves any errors?  I would expect that maybe FE global variable
> diagostics are defered until that?  It would be nice to finally move
> the call to cgraph_finalize_compilation_unit to the middle-end ...
> (warning, if you try that you run into an issue with the Java frontend ... :/)
I bet it does preserve some errors. I noticed that when I analyzed a bit 
PR40405, see Comment #3 in particular.

Thanks,
Paolo.