Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uiucdcsb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcsb!grunwald
From: grunwald@uiucdcsb.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Unknown what?
Message-ID: <139200001@uiucdcsb.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Jan-85 22:50:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcsb.139200001
Posted: Tue Jan 22 22:50:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Jan-85 08:05:24 EST
References: <189@wuphys.UUCP>
Lines: 10
Nf-ID: #R:wuphys:-18900:uiucdcsb:139200001:000:605
Nf-From: uiucdcsb!grunwald    Jan 22 21:50:00 1985

what a crock. "most compilers spit out cryptic messages" -- mainly because
people are lazy about developing proper parsers.
	When using a C compiler on a PC/AT w/XENIX, it spits out what it thinks
is missing. In a LALR language (e.g. C), you know what the expected followset
is supposed to be -- It would be possible to say what you expect to see at this
point (although that might be a little too much text).
	If PCC would use be extended to use the Graham-Rhodes error recovery
to try and be a little more graceful about compiling, like the pascal (pc)
compiler does, I for one would be a happier grub.