[Bug ld/11793] Add suggestion to error "undefined reference to `vtable for XXX'"

[phresnel at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From phresnel at gmail dot com  2010-07-07 15:24 
-------
(In reply to comment #1)
> If any suggestion is made to the user, it should be to ensure that all 
> non-pure
> virtual functions are defined.  Which is what the GCC FAQ already says:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#vtables

This is a perfect suggestion, of course. But the suggestion I am trying to make,
sorry if I was unprecise, is that g++ or ld *does* output *some* suggestion (or
better error message).

I see it as with good documentation: It is optional, but would increase
usability and decrease the chill-aways before the matter in question. 

I know this is not llvm, and I am not a user of llvm, but this is primarily
because clang++ is yet incomplete vs. the holy standard, and because gcc
optimization seems superiour to any other free compiler. But at three things
llvm *seems* to be largely superiour over gcc (incl. some proprietary ones),
which is 

a) error messages [0]
b) fast compiles [1]
c) low memory usage [1]

I'd also prefer gcc from the license viewpoint, but honestly, it is such
implementation "detail" that could make quite a few people move away from gcc,
at least for on-the-hack compilation (in contrast to complete release builds).

[0] http://clang.llvm.org/diagnostics.html
[1] http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#performance

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11793

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.