If the compiler worked like a spell checker, it could pop up a dialog and say "Detected a syntax error xxx, I think you should change your code to yyy. Shall I change it?"
I spend a lot of my debugging time nailing spelling errors and missing braces. I'd rather the compiler took a guess and asked me if it was right. Pressing 'y' five times would be so much nicer than having to get back into the text editor 5 times. And if I have to press 'n' and fix it by hand, I've lost nothing.
How much different from "Might be a runaway multi-line "" string starting on line N" is that?
Just as a more useful example, why not use Symbol::Approx to guess what function I misspelled, and then suggest the correction to me?
Or how about 'Detected missing semicolon at line 33, shall I correct?' Why is it a good use of my time to correct this trivial problem by hand?
Or how about "Unmatched left brace at line 133, but if I pop a brace in front of the next 'sub xxx', I can compile. Want me to fix it?"
In reply to Re: Re: making perl more forgiving
by jepri
in thread making perl more forgiving
by simplitia
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |