[cfe-dev] Chrome/mac is all-clang, all-the-time

[Miles Bader]

2011/11/1 Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>:
> I'm really sorry that came off as condescending, it wasn't meant to be. The
> cost imposed by switching to Clang's error messages was one we took very
> seriously. Working with GCC for a long time isn't a negative statement about
> the developer, it's a simple reality given the long history GCC has in the
> open source community as essentially the only compiler option available.

Er, well you basically divided your user base into two categories:
those who eagerly embraced clang, and those who were too
dim/rigid/inexperienced to appreciate it -- with what seems to be the
implication that anybody in the former group _must_ be in the latter.
That's veering pretty close to True Scotsman territory...

While I'm sure both types of user are present, I suspect that you're
omitting another group:  those who don't really care so much either
way -- especially amongst those whose compiler usage doesn't usually
tickle the particularly egregious cases (e.g. C developers -- like
Gnome! -- and C++ devs who aren't pushing boundaries with templates),
and developers who are experienced enough (as I imagine most google
devs to be!) that they aren't particularly bothered by the specific
wording of error messages...

Again, I don't want to seem like I'm speaking _against_ clang -- I'm
not, I use it, and I like it -- and clang certainly does generally
have pretty clear error messages.  But there seems to be this idea
floating around that gcc's error messages are unusably bad, and that
clang's are in a completely different class, and _that_ I just don't
see.

[I should note, btw, that gcc is developed too -- and that includes
improving the error messages, and compilation speed...]

-miles

-- 
Cat is power.  Cat is peace.