On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:00:16AM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > I wrote a little blog post that shows off some of the things that Clang can > do. It would be great to improve some of GCC/G++'s diagnostics in a similar > way: > > http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/amazing-feats-of-clang-error-recovery.html
Some of Chris's examples appear to be regressions, in that gcc's old bison-based parser did a better job than the current parser. In particular, around the time of the 2->3 transition, a rule was added to catch the fact that foo bar; where neither is defined as a type, almost certainly is because of a missing definition of the type foo, or a mis-spelling (this is what is going on in several of Chris's examples). I pushed to get that rule added because I tried a lot of "C++" code that had only been compiled with g++ 2.9x, and it was filled with uses of STL without std:: because back then, the standard library wasn't in a namespace and std:: was magic that was ignored.
