Hacker News Reader

> I have met a few folks who switched from gcc to clang mostly because of a feature like this!

I'm in that camp. Both compilers function properly for what I need to do, but clang's output is a lot friendlier. The choice to switch was easy to make.

View on HN

New versions of g++ (4.9+) have much better error messages (g++ has better errors than gcc).

Are template-related errors also better? I remember being deathly afraid of messing up something that uses std::string because I would just get back pages and pages of errors (or pages and pages of a single error).

I sure hope so. C++ templates are the worst thing ever for debuggability. And all the most useful C++ containers etc are templates. That's the Achilles heel of C++.

Somewhat. You still get error novels, but anecdotally, it seems like the error messages are more likely to identify the important details first before giving you all the information you might possibly want.

Agreed, Chandler from Google makes the good case here for Clang.

Chandler Carruth - Clang: Defending C++ from Murphy's Million Monkeys GoingNative 2012 - Day 2 - Clang https://youtu.be/NURiiQatBXA

Reply on news.ycombinator.com