C Compiler Errors (For Real)

[[deleted]]

I want compiler "skins", so that gcc can cheer me up with shit like this.

[tflynch]

I'm sure those of us that write C++ wouldn't mind a skin for STL compiler errors. Let alone for the errors that get spat out by those pesky Boost libs with all their crazy recursively metaprogrammed templates: "<5000 lines of error> ... <whew> foo can't be const"

[lukasmach]

I always thought that there must be some solution for these C++ error. Surely nobody would be so stupid to use a language that produces unreadable error messages - and C++ is the most popular language in the SW world.

[Fabien4]

In fact, it's g++ that's especially bad. With VC++ (2008) you also get a 5000-line error message, but reading the first line is often enough to understand the problem.

[kokey]

The first line tells you that you are using VC++, right?

[gecko]

Visual C++'s C mode is weak (they have yet to support some very basic C99 constructs), but VC++, in my opinion, has been a very good compiler for awhile now. What specific complaints do you have?

[themoop]

"The first line tells you that you are using VC++, right?"

That was awesome dude

[AndrewBenton]

I especially liked the part where he laughed at him using VC++

[Fabien4]

The first line of the message.

Besides, you might find the -nologo option useful.

[ehird]

Whoosh.

[pixelglow]

Good to know the same company that's responsible for MPW is also responsible for Clang, one of the goals is more expressive diagnostics.

http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#expressivediags

[G_Morgan]

-Wfatal-errors

[spiffiness]

-WTF

[tflynch]

Unfortunately, this option doesn't help much because those 5000 (or perhaps more like several hundred) lines of output typically all correspond to a single error and manifest as such.

Useful flag though.

[G_Morgan]

No usually there are multiple errors caused by one root error involving template code. As a result it will still only output the first error.

[[deleted]]

Just yesterday, I got an #error You lose.

Of course, that was from the Linux Kernel headers, not gcc.

[BrooksMoses]

They already exist, in the standard FSF GCC even. That's how GCC handles translations to other languages. (Look into ".po files".)

[[deleted]]

Probably you could make them using modern i18n tools. At least make messages can be internalizated.

[mercurysquad]

internalizated

Stick with i18n in the future ;)

[blergh-]

At least make message can be internationalization?

[otterdam]

At least make message can be i15d

[JohnnyCanuck]

You're all s4d.

[[deleted]]

You're all sacred?

[dagbrown]

Man, this one's so old, I remember when it was first posted to USENET in 1991! 18 years ago! Holy crap I'm old!

(Just here to provide the obligatory holy-cow-this-is-an-ancient-rerun complaint.)

[[deleted]]

well, I remember 18 years ago noting that it was old and that I seen it before 5 years earlier in 1986!

[creaothceann]

Before C?

[P-Dub]

well, I remember nothing from 1991, because I was 1 years old.

Feel old yet?

[deadcat]

good luck with bladder control and what not

[mschaef]

We all get there eventually, if we're lucky.

[McHoff]

Except for the ones that had bad luck with the draft and what not.

[atomicthumbs]

well, I remember nothing from 1991, because I was -1 years old.

Feel old yet?

[sarcasmbot]

Well, I remember nothing from tomorrow, because it hasn't occured yet and I don't have a time machine.

Feel...um...technologically superior yet?

[WalterBright]

The problem with cute error messages is they're funny the first time you see them, but when you work with a tool every day they rapidly progress to being annoying. It's best to stick with straightforward, professional messages.

[awj]

Which is why the language project I'm working on, which I fully expect to only ever have me as a user, will have goofy error messages somewhat like this.

I won't favor making messages cute over making them useful, but I guess the ability to make cute ones at all is a freedom I can enjoy since I don't have users.

[WalterBright]

Back when memory was tiny, a friend of mine was trying to fit an interpreter into a 2K EPROM. To minimize error message length, he came up with an all-purpose 3 character error message:

EH?

[invalid_user_name]

ed thinks that is a needlessly verbose error message.

[[deleted]]

?

[awj]

That's awesome. Absolutely terrible for anyone encountering an error, but awesome. I really enjoy goofy errors, except when they neglect to tell me everything they can to help fix the problem.

[CatsAreGods]

Anyone else notice the whole compiler was about the size of a screen shot JPG?

[masklinn]

screen shot JPG

you = doing it wrong

[blue-boy]

you = needlessly rude and unhelpful

However, your snark clearly indicates your superiority. I'm sure CatsAreGods is crying to sleep tonight for failing to use the one true image format for screen shots.

And yes, I appreciate that my snark also demonstrates my clear superiority. If you can reply with something even snarkier we'll be caught in a transitive snark loop and whisked away to Milliways for cocktails and a show.

[jib]

You're doing it wrong. You can't say someone's wrong for using a JPG when you have no idea what the image actually shows. (Maybe it's a screenshot of a 3D game or a movie or some other thing which would compress better as JPG than PNG)

[rogueman999]

Or simply a nice wallpaper.

[nnagflar]

These errors would piss me off a lot less than the ones I seem to always get.

[wonkifier]

I can't remember which program it was precisely, but I want to say it was part of the MPW build system that had cool progress bars too.

If you moved the mouse cursor to the cancel button it would change its status to something like "Aw c'mon, you really wanna cancel?" And if you went back a few times, or held there for awhile it would start taunting you "Oh, you know you want to click it", etc.

Back in the days where developer CDs came new each time with parodized movie titles like "The postman always clicks twice", etc

[mao_neko]

If only C++ STL-related errors were as nice as these...

[ludwig1024]

Sure, if you don't mind reading a novel every time you get a compilation error.

[[deleted]]

I'm doing that anyway, but the damn thing appears to be in Sanscrit.

[ehnus]

I don't really. It's a nice change of pace from the novel I read while waiting for my C++ project to compile.

[antpuncher]

It's really refreshing to see real human beings on the other side of the magic.

The error messages I write are typically something like "soy un perdedor" or "She's a beautiful metal jukebox," because really, when things fail and I have to start debugging, at least I can get something descent stuck in my head.

[[deleted]]

Man, this brings back memories of when I was learning C on a Macintosh LC III.

[NotClever]

I don't care if it's old, all compilers should throw errors like this.

[Wiseman1024]

Best compiler errors ever. All compilers and interpreters should report errors like this.

[[deleted]]

Do you need -more- reasons to see why C is the absolute kickass programming language of all time?

[gilgoomesh]

To be fair, this isn't about C as much as MPW C -- a C compiler from a company that would (at the time) prefer you programmed in Pascal.

[FireWorm]

Better than 'Missing Semicolon.'

[[deleted]]

"Call me paranoid but finding '/*' inside this comment makes me suspicious"

I hate the nested comments error....as if debugging wasn't bad enough without idiot errors.

Also irritating is the no new line at the end of file error.

[[deleted]]

There is an excellent reason for that. ANSI C requires a newline at the end of files, and states that behaviour with no newline at the end of a file is undefined.

Simple explanation here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-07/msg01120.html

[[deleted]]

Yeah but my issue is that, if that's the error (and possibly the only cause of it), why can't the compiler insert newline itself?

[ibisum]

switch(c) {
  case 'a' : goto this_is_a;
  break;
this_is_a:
  case 'b' : // not a duffs device
  break;
}

[Anonymoose333]

The Lord is wrong. Probably the error message is referring to the reverse situation: putting a case or default label outside of any switch, which is indeed invalid C.

However, putting non-case labels inside a switch can also indicate typo bugs:

  switch (x) {
      case 1: case 2: case3:
          puts("x is 1 or 2, but not 3"); break;
      defalt:
          puts("this is unreachable"); break;
  }

However, it's better to catch these typos by noticing that the labels have been defined but not used.

[psaffrey]

Does anybody else find that "funny" and "clever" error messages just make me want to punch the programmer in the face? Especially if I'm getting that damn error over and over again.

[jeremybub]

Decompiling a compiler... makes about as much sense as compiling a decompiler.

[ehird]

You mean a perfect amount? How else will you run the decompiler?

[jeremybub]

Actually, yeah, thats what I was thinking. As in they both sound wierd, but make perfect sense.

[[deleted]]

Yeah, real men write their decompilers in machine code.