Subject: Re: [boost] Scalpel: a Spirit&Wave-powered C++ source code analysis library
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-07 10:16:07
Doug Gregor wrote:
> Dave Abrahams wrote:
> > Now it's my turn to be a little skeptical. I can't imagine a
> > compiler would ever try to do error recovery by throwing out
> > all the information from
> > #include files you had already processed.
> Heck no! But in the absence of information (e.g., an #include couldn't
> be found, or an identifier is horribly mis-typed), such approaches
> could drastically improve recovery.
>From my naive user point of view, there is a "preprocessing" step, a "compilation" step and a "linking" step. As a compiler user, I would prefer that the compiler doesn't start the "compilation" step in case the "preprocessing" step failed (e.g., an #include couldn't be found). Similar, I would prefer that the compiler doesn't start the "link" step in case the "compilation" step failed.
I know that GCC has a different opinion about this, but I prefer the behavior MSVC in this case.