On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Yes, color can enhance the messages. I don't think we disagree
on that. My point was that color is a harder problem that many
people understand. For instance, there is no set of colors that
meet web contrast standards against both black and white bac
On 4/12/12, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Lawrence Crowl writes:
> > On 4/12/12, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> > > So given your ideal implementation, if the user-visible
> > > result was exactly like the one in Clang, will you be happy
> > > with any of the three things: ranges, color and fix-it hin
On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 10:29 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> There is some repeat here. Over 13 years ago, people were screaming
> to have line wrapping by default -- because the diagnostic
> messages related to templates were just too long and too awful.
> I implemented line wrapping for g++ and
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:59 AM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:41 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM, NightStrike
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:41 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM, NightStrike wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:41 AM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
Shooting down a potentially user friendly feature t
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>>> Shooting down a potentially user friendly feature to wait until some blue
>>> sky redesign is implemented means it mi
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> Shooting down a potentially user friendly feature to wait until some blue
>> sky redesign is implemented means it might never be implemented.
>
> This is a mischaracterization an
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ludovic Courtès
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Richard Guenther skribis:
>
>> And since yesterday GCC shows
>>
>> t.C:2:10: error: expected ';' after class definition
>> class a {}
>> ^
>> t.C:6:1: error: expected ';' after struct definition
>> }
>> ^
>>
>> as w
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Shooting down a potentially user friendly feature to wait until some blue
> sky redesign is implemented means it might never be implemented.
This is a mischaracterization and you know it.
-- Gaby
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 04:09:19AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> the short term desire to add color should not cloud the architectural
> concerns.
> I don't want to get into a situation when in 3 months someone come and
> complain
> that the diagnostic code is too obscure or to hard to debug,
Hello,
Richard Guenther skribis:
> And since yesterday GCC shows
>
> t.C:2:10: error: expected ';' after class definition
> class a {}
> ^
> t.C:6:1: error: expected ';' after struct definition
> }
> ^
>
> as we now enabled -fdiagnostics-show-caret by default.
How important is it t
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 6:36 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> I suppose we'd want to make the diagnostic machinery accessible by
> plugins so that IDEs could get an easier hand on things anyway. That
> way colorization could be achieved using a plugin, too.
Indeed, we definitely want a standard wa
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 13 April 2012 11:04, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Jonathan Wakely
>> wrote:
>>> On 13 April 2012 02:40, Joe Buck wrote:
I'm not interested in color output, and would turn it off if it were
>
On 13 April 2012 11:04, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
>> On 13 April 2012 02:40, Joe Buck wrote:
>>> I'm not interested in color output, and would turn it off if it were
>>> implemented (the escape sequences would just mess things up when cap
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 13 April 2012 10:46, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:41 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
>> wrote:
>>
>>> But I don't want to turn the diagnostics machinery upside down and
>>> implement a "diagnostics internal langu
On 13 April 2012 09:27, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>
> I think my words above should be read in their own context, where
> their true meaning can be fully appreciated. Then, one may be able to
> appreciate that:
>
> * Saying "I don't think X is important, so I am against it and you
> should spend y
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 13 April 2012 02:40, Joe Buck wrote:
>> I'm not interested in color output, and would turn it off if it were
>> implemented (the escape sequences would just mess things up when capturing
>> compiler output in log files).
>
> There's no r
On 13 April 2012 10:46, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:41 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>
>> But I don't want to turn the diagnostics machinery upside down and
>> implement a "diagnostics internal language"
>
> I do think an internal formatting IL/IR for better representa
On 13 April 2012 02:40, Joe Buck wrote:
> I'm not interested in color output, and would turn it off if it were
> implemented (the escape sequences would just mess things up when capturing
> compiler output in log files).
There's no reason it would have to do that. Git does a great job of
colourin
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:41 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> But I don't want to turn the diagnostics machinery upside down and
> implement a "diagnostics internal language"
I do think an internal formatting IL/IR for better representation is
needed for the
kind of things you would like to (e.
On 13 April 2012 08:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 10:11:48PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> Lawrence Crowl writes:
>>
>> > On 4/12/12, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> >> So given your ideal implementation, if the user-visible result
>> >> was exactly like the one in Clang,
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 13 April 2012 05:36, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I find the color output of Clang just beautiful and, in my opinion,
>>> color support in GCC would make it a b
On 13 April 2012 05:36, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>
>> I find the color output of Clang just beautiful and, in my opinion,
>> color support in GCC would make it a bit more beautiful and attract
>> new users, so it is a much better use
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> we should limit to a very small
> set of colors, because not so many colors are actually very readable and
> perhaps make the color sets configurable somehow (things might be different
> if people use normally black characters on white backg
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 10:11:48PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Lawrence Crowl writes:
>
> > On 4/12/12, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> >> So given your ideal implementation, if the user-visible result
> >> was exactly like the one in Clang, will you be happy with any of
> >> the three things:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I personally think it would be an excellent idea. Even clang's C++
> error messages can be long. A simple use of color is an excellent way
> to draw the eye to the more important parts of the message. If the
> color is not available,
Lawrence Crowl writes:
> On 4/12/12, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> So given your ideal implementation, if the user-visible result
>> was exactly like the one in Clang, will you be happy with any of
>> the three things: ranges, color and fix-it hints?
>
> There are many issues with color. Does y
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> I find the color output of Clang just beautiful and, in my opinion,
> color support in GCC would make it a bit more beautiful and attract
> new users, so it is a much better use of developer's time than fixing
> yet another obscure dia
On 13 April 2012 03:40, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:42:19AM +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> I would like to have color output. And since nobody is paying me to do
>> this work, I'd rather work on what I would like to have. The question
>> is whether this is something that GCC
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:42:19AM +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> I would like to have color output. And since nobody is paying me to do
> this work, I'd rather work on what I would like to have. The question
> is whether this is something that GCC wants to have.
>
> If the answer is NO, that
On 13 April 2012 00:17, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>> On 12 April 2012 23:54, Gabriel Dos Reis
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
>>> wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
[]
Of course, the major quest
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 12 April 2012 22:53, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> yes ..
>
> Excellent, thanks, and thanks for the link to the pdf, I hadn't seen
> it before and GCC does do pretty poorly with those examples.
The talk was given pretty recently ..
David
On 12 April 2012 22:53, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> yes ..
Excellent, thanks, and thanks for the link to the pdf, I hadn't seen
it before and GCC does do pretty poorly with those examples.
> thanks,
>
> David
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
>> On 12 April 2012 22:3
On 4/12/12, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> So given your ideal implementation, if the user-visible result
> was exactly like the one in Clang, will you be happy with any of
> the three things: ranges, color and fix-it hints?
There are many issues with color. Does your reader have any
color deficie
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 12 April 2012 23:54, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>[]
>>> Of course, the major question is: Are the decision makers in GCC
>>> interested on any
On 12 April 2012 23:54, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
> wrote:
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>[]
>> Of course, the major question is: Are the decision makers in GCC
>> interested on any of this?
>>
>> Would some reviewer reject patches implementing them?
>
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>[]
> Of course, the major question is: Are the decision makers in GCC
> interested on any of this?
>
> Would some reviewer reject patches implementing them?
I suspect decisions will be based on the implementations the
yes ..
thanks,
David
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 12 April 2012 22:32, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> Thanks for preparing the wiki page. I have looked at the examples from
>> this slide: http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/events/GoingNative12/GN12Clang.pdf
>> with trunk
On 12 April 2012 22:32, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Thanks for preparing the wiki page. I have looked at the examples from
> this slide: http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/events/GoingNative12/GN12Clang.pdf
> with trunk gcc. In some cases, gcc's warning matches that of clang but
> in majority of cases, gc
Hi Jonathan,
I think the wiki page is a great idea! Thanks for doing this.
I am planning to open PRs for all the issues where GCC is worse. I
think it would be nice to have even more examples where GCC is better.
Examples where GCC is worse can be added to
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Better_Diagnosti
Thanks for preparing the wiki page. I have looked at the examples from
this slide: http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/events/GoingNative12/GN12Clang.pdf
with trunk gcc. In some cases, gcc's warning matches that of clang but
in majority of cases, gcc either emits no warnings or worse ones. The
warnings in
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 12 April 2012 11:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> Two more examples, then I'll save it for a wiki page instead of the
>> mailing list:
>
> And here it is:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/ClangDiagnosticsComparison
Thanks; this is useful.
-- G
On 12 April 2012 11:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Two more examples, then I'll save it for a wiki page instead of the
> mailing list:
And here it is:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/ClangDiagnosticsComparison
On 12 April 2012 11:35, Richard Guenther wrote:
> And since yesterday GCC shows
>
> t.C:2:10: error: expected ';' after class definition
> class a {}
> ^
> t.C:6:1: error: expected ';' after struct definition
> }
> ^
>
> as we now enabled -fdiagnostics-show-caret by default.
Yep :-)
B
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 11 April 2012 19:41, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 04/11/2012 07:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>>> GCC's diagnostics have got a lot better recently.
>>>
>>> The http://clang.llvm.org/diagnostics.html page compares clang's
>>> diagnostics
On 04/12/2012 11:01 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Manu has filed lots of bugs in bugzilla with specific comparisons of
> GCC's diagnostics to Clang's.
>
> I'll start a page on the GCC wiki but I hope others will add to it.
> The people asking to see results should be the ones doing the
> compariso
48 matches
Mail list logo
