Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.compilers > #1456

Re: Error-handling if your compiler had an attitude.

Show key headers only | View raw

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 13:51:06 -0800 (PST), federation2005@netzero.com
wrote:

>What if your compiler had an attitude problem? I was thinking of funny things
>it could do for error-handling (maybe with a -X switch for GenX/Millennial
>verbose output):

     HA!  I did something like this for an assignment in COBOL for
implementing an AirMiles-type program.  I had two versions of
messages, one in CorpSpeak and one in smart-alecky language.  For
example, the trademark messages were something like:

AirKloms is a trademark of BobCorp International, and we are a
licenced user of the mark.

AirKloms belongs to BobCorp.  We are in with the man.  You aren't.  Go
ahead, punk.  Make our lawyers rich.

Warning messages ended with either

- Continuing

or

- I'll try to cope.

     It was great fun!

     The messages need not be GenX/Millennial to snark.  Here are my
versions:

>* It addresses you like "Dude! You boffed the syntax again." or the like.

     "Were you a disappointment to your English teacher, too?"

>* It tells you to get glasses if you keep missing semicolons [Note 1].

     "Since you do not seem to like semicolons, you might try
JavaScript where they are optional."

>* If you use older or archaic style (particularly, deprecated stuff), it makes
>fun of you and asks if you need help with your walker. [Note 2].

     "It has been a while since I last compiled that type of
statement.  Let me check; it might be a valuable antique."

>* When variables are spelled inconsistently, it recommends Sesame Street to
>you for remedial assistance.

     "Either you have missing declarations or no dictionary."

>* When you forget to include declarations for built-in stuff, it pretends it's
>never heard of the function, like "what's a 'printf' and why is the 'f'
>there?"

     "Some compilers assume that you are so stupid that they need to
assume stuff for you.  I prefer to think that you know better, but I
am beginning to think that the other compilers may be right."

>* Other undeclared externals get replies like "What? Am I supposed to figure
>out what my_func is by myself?"

     "Mother says that I should not talk to strangers.  Please
introduce us."

>* When there are too many errors, it may reply with "you're in way over your
>head" or "are you sure you're using the right language?"

     "Computers are sensitive pieces of equipment.  Please have your
cat walk somewhere else."

     Mind you, C++ can do it all by itself with one error.  I once
forgot the parens around two calls in one statement and got over 100
error messages.  The compiler stopped, because it hit the maximum.

>* It may also silently rack up error counts and afterwards ask, "There are
>2015 errors. Would you like to see them all? Huh? Huh?"

     "There were rather a lot of errors in that code.  Which order
would you prefer that I present the error messages in, and would you
like the output bound or loose?"

>* If you keep using keywords as your own variable names or other names, it
>goes like "Stop that!" and threatens to delete or uninstall itself, maybe with
>a menacing statement "I know where my home directory is." or "I hope you kept
>backups of your installation files."

     "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

>[I recall a few compilers a long time ago, like the 1970s, that tried
>to be cute.  It was amusing for about 5 minutes, then annoying.

     Yes, it would be quite annoying, but not quite as bad as UNIX man
pages.  Too many that I saw "documented" error messages with the note
that they were self-explanatory.

>Also see http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/29/facebook-apologises-over-cruel-year-in-review-clips
>-John]

     Ouch!

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Error-handling if your compiler had an attitude. federation2005@netzero.com - 2014-12-29 13:51 -0800
  Re: Error-handling if your compiler had an attitude. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-30 02:57 +0000
  Re: Error-handling if your compiler had an attitude. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-12-30 11:27 -0500
  Re: Error-handling if your compiler had an attitude. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-12-30 13:13 -0800
  Re: Error-handling if your compiler had an attitude. Christophe de Dinechin <christophe.de.dinechin@gmail.com> - 2015-01-12 07:25 -0800

csiph-web