Re: Syntax for label, NEW PROPOSAL

From: John Max Skaller (skaller@maxtal.com.au)
Date: Wed Mar 15 2000 - 22:30:18 MET

  • Next message: Julian Assange: "Re: Syntax for label, NEW PROPOSAL"

    Pierre Weis wrote:

    > Clearly, there is something wrong now! We may remark that the error
    > message is not that clear, but this is a minor point, since error
    > messages are never clear enough anyway!

            This is not a 'minor' point, but the most significant obstacle
    in the way of adoption of languages (like ocaml) that do a lot of type
    inference. Incomprehensible -- indeed plain wrong -- error messages
    crop up regularly with ocaml, and vie with the kind of gibberish
    errors instantiating C++ templates usually give for
    'most obscuficated error message' competition :-)

            The recent addition of better error messages in the case
    of missing cases of matches has been a _major_ improvement IMHO:
    it has already saved me significant time; since I often enhance
    the set of cases of a variant, and need to chase down every
    match and update it.

            I'm not using -modern mode and the main reason is the scary
    error messages. Even the polymorphic variants are scary, since one
    looses the ability to 'spell check' variant tags. I actually tried
    to take a fairly large, fundamental, type in Vyper (the type of most
    language terms and runtime values) and use polymorphic variants
    to classify them (the classes overlap, which ordinary variants
    cannot handle), and gave up, because I couldn't understand the
    error messages.

            Recent discussions in the Python types-SIG concerning
    type inference showed a strong indication (mainly from ex-ML
    users) NOT to use any kind of type inference that could lead
    to incomprehensible error messages.

            I personally use errors to drive development.
    I expect a compiler to tell me the line that next needs editing.
    Ocaml is fairly good here now, but I still cringe in fear
    when i get too incompatible object types and pages of
    method signatures the compiler claims are different.

    Why can't it tell me the differences more often?
    I does well sometimes telling me that one sig has a method the
    other lacks.

    -- 
    John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
    10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
    checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
    download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 17 2000 - 10:04:01 MET