Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!mephisto!prism!fsu!gw.scri.fsu.edu"!"pepke From: pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu ("Eric Pepke") Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: MPW wish list Message-ID: <504@fsu.scri.fsu.edu> Date: 13 Feb 90 14:28:38 GMT Sender: news@fsu.scri.fsu.edu Organization: "Florida State University" Lines: 26 References:<1990Jan23.065751.29303@peace.waikato.ac.nz> <6310@internal.Apple.COM> <55359@hobbit.UUCP> <1990Jan25.191441.26280@oracle.com> <416@dbase.A-T.COM> <19240@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <10865@claris.com> <19265@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <2930@draken.nada.kth.se> In article <2930@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte) writes: > _My_ pet peeve is that THINK C halts at the first error encountered. > It could give a list of errors, like the link error list, and have a > "Next Error" menu item / key (Like EMACS !) De gustibus non disputandum est. Personally, I like this feature. Except when I am converting a large code from some other source, I seldom get more than one or two errors in a file. Part of the reason for this is that Think C makes checking syntax quite painless, so I do it often. I have used boatloads of other, more traditional compilers, both C and Pascal, on a variety of computers. When I see a cascading list of error messages, nearly always there is only one real error, and the rest are artifacts of the compiler's error recovery algorithm. It is sometimes easy to see which ones are specious by comparing the descriptions, but I would rather not be bothered with the red herrings. Your mileage may vary. Now, if they would only improve the code generation... Eric Pepke INTERNET: pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu Supercomputer Computations Research Institute MFENET: pepke@fsu Florida State University SPAN: scri::pepke Tallahassee, FL 32306-4052 BITNET: pepke@fsu Disclaimer: My employers seldom even LISTEN to my opinions. Meta-disclaimer: Any society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.