[MLton] caching elaboration
Daniel C. Wang
Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:52:02 -0400
Henry Cejtin wrote:
> I think I disagree on re-ordering error reports for only one reason: when a
> compiler spots an error, it makes some kind of correction. This is clearly
> the case with syntax errors, but even for type errors. This means that all
> errors reported later are suspect because they are errors in a program
> different from what I gave to the compiler. They are errors in the
> `corrected' program.
Well, the right thing to do is to track which errors are "atomic" and which
are the result of a "correction" with this information you can decide to
filter the error messages to include only the atomic errors and maybe the
first N or so supect errors or always report the atomic errors first. Norman
Ramsey has a paper on error combinators that let you propagate this derived
vs atomic error information relatively easily.
I think the issue of error recovery is really unrelated to the detection vs
reporting gripe I have.