Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: What constitutes "standard" C? |
| Date | 2015-03-27 20:14 +0000 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <mf4dnt$qek$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <P4OKw.34683$u24.23323@fx07.iad> <kfnvbhqdmo8.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <87lhilqdlr.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <kfnr3scadq8.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <87619ops8j.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote: (snip) > Suppose we have two nearly identical translation units. Both exceed the > resource requirements of the compiler; it runs out of memory about > halfway through. The first is otherwise syntaxctically and semantically > valid. The second is identical except for a missing } at the end. > I'd expect the compiler to behave identically for both, dying with a > fatal error message when it runs out of memory and terminating. It > doesn't seem reasonable to expect the compiler to continue processing so > it can detect the missing }. In the days of batch processing, when it might be hours before you saw the output from the compiler, it was nice of compilers to generate all the possible messages. That is, even when it couldn't generate output to still be able to parse the input and generate syntax errors, maybe a little more. But if the compiler gives up on the first error, that probably isn't good enough today. -- glen
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
What constitutes "standard" C? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-03-06 23:41 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-03-07 02:57 -0600
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-07 02:51 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 11:25 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 18:34 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-09 11:21 -0400
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-09 16:08 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 15:07 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 11:21 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-07 11:24 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 17:09 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-07 12:47 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-07 17:47 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 15:43 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-08 01:03 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-07 21:02 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 18:51 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-24 16:02 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-25 08:52 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 15:55 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-25 16:33 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-27 20:14 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-27 17:19 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-27 17:30 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-28 14:27 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-28 20:43 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-04 12:15 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-05 01:13 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-05 13:43 -0400
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-05 20:14 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-05 13:28 -0700
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-05 17:56 -0400
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Lőrinczy Zsigmond <nospam@for.me> - 2015-03-07 14:03 +0100
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-07 13:30 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-07 14:42 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 08:33 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 18:53 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 16:42 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 15:49 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 05:13 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-03-07 15:35 +0000
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-03-07 10:49 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-03-07 10:52 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-07 11:21 -0500
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-07 17:10 -0800
Re: What constitutes "standard" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-09 11:32 -0400
csiph-web