From: "Michael Stewart" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: definatly an error in either the compiler or RHIDE: Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 08:31:21 +0100 Organization: (Posted via) Netcom Internet Ltd. Message-ID: <7jqdom$4l0$1@taliesin.netcom.net.uk> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: hgty.capgemini.co.uk X-Trace: taliesin.netcom.net.uk 929086038 4768 194.42.240.2 (11 Jun 1999 07:27:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse AT corp DOT netcom DOT net DOT uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Jun 1999 07:27:18 GMT X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Lines: 34 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Dlanor Blytkerchan wrote in message ... >Small, insignificant, yes. But still worth mentioning: > >Writing a sloppy C++ program with a lot of errors in it, the compiler >returned all those errors to me with the wrong line numbers. For example, I >was declaring a class variable from main (somewhere beyond line 50 in my >source): > >int main(void) { > blabla bla1; > blabla bla2; > blabla bla3; > classType classVar = new classType(bullshit); > > (..) > > return(0); >} // main() > >guess what? It didn't work. (Ofcourse not: I had even declared the class >itself all wrong, more like a struct than a class..). The compiler returned >an error message indicating that the fault was in main() (which is right), >on line number 4 of the file (which is wrong: it is line number four in the >method, but definatly not in the file). RHIDE promptly pointed me to that >line. Either RHIDE is wrong or the compiler is (though it was right that I >was producing errors more than it was, so I stopped programming and started >E-mailing). This may be due to optimisations being switched on. Michael Stewart