Sivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to 195@lemmy.world · 1 year agocoming here was a trap, but I shall obligelemmy.dbzer0.comimagemessage-square8fedilinkarrow-up1114arrow-down14
arrow-up1110arrow-down1imagecoming here was a trap, but I shall obligelemmy.dbzer0.comSivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to 195@lemmy.world · 1 year agomessage-square8fedilink
minus-squareperviouslyiner@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up25arrow-down1·1 year ago“Here is the source of your error” (points to a template definition 15 levels deep in the standard library)
minus-squareSivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up13arrow-down1·1 year ago“error on line” (points to syntactically perfectly fine line of code until you realize, that you forgot to add the semicolon after your macro on the previous line)
minus-squareChaislinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoAlthough that’s gotten better in recent years, as I recall.
minus-squareSivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year agoyeah, think so too. at least with some standard library stuff.
minus-squareSivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoYes, but I’m not sure how good the compiler is with arbitrary macros as opposed to the stdlib ones.
“Here is the source of your error” (points to a template definition 15 levels deep in the standard library)
“error on line” (points to syntactically perfectly fine line of code until you realize, that you forgot to add the semicolon after your macro on the previous line)
Although that’s gotten better in recent years, as I recall.
yeah, think so too. at least with some standard library stuff.
Isn’t that mostly a matter for the compiler?
Yes, but I’m not sure how good the compiler is with arbitrary macros as opposed to the stdlib ones.
deleted by creator