D2 is really that stable as it is claimed to be?

[Walter Bright]

On 9/24/2013 3:04 PM, bearophile wrote:
> The problem with grepping is that it could lead to mistakes, you have to grep
> for the whole error message, otherwise you risk finding the wrong message.

It's hardly a risk. If you get 2 hits, you skip the one that's a mismatch.


> Another problem is that the wording could change, both in different versions of
> the same compiler and in different compilers, so every compiler needs its own
> wiki.

That problem is MUCH WORSE with error numbers. Remember, I have tried it in the 
past.


> Also, if you need to use a search, you must have all the error messages in
> the same page, while with error messages you could just go directly to the page
> number and you don't need to copy and paste several (all) the words of the error
> message. Having a standard number across all D compilers allows for a
> standardization of tools (the IDE has to show the same error tooltips regardless
> the D compiler you are using). Another advantage of numbers of error messages is
> that if two different points of the same compiler have to generate the same
> error, using the same code number there is no risk the error message could go
> out of sync to each other. This has happened in DMD, where I have seen the same
> error give different error messages with the same dmd
> (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11094 ).

Standardization of error messages, let alone standardization of error message 
numbers, is a very bad idea. It presumes all implementations are identical, and 
hamstrings attempts at innovation.


>> What makes me grumpy is people only want these things when some other
>> compiler does it, sort of a bandwagon thing.
>
> I have tried to show, here and in Issue 5004, that's not true.

I don't believe it, based on plenty of experience with "grass is greener" 
compiler ephemera.