Gregory's Server|
5 comments
 @wakame @tess @publius @mhoye That sounds like a very dangerous experiment with significant privacy issues. In highly expressive and/or dynamic languages, it could also be of very limited use. (But then such dynamic languages usually also have dynamic checks that can tell you *why* the type of something is wrong.) |
@lispi314 @tess @publius @mhoye
A little more complicated, more a thought experiment:
Every time a compiler (anywhere in the world) stumbles and falls over a line, log that somewhere centrally.
If compiling succeeds later, log also if and how the offending line has been changed.
Then, combine the most common(?) or most unsimilar looking(hello Levenshtein) lines and solutions and show some of them to the user (in case a compile fails).
For a project, it might also be helpful if e.g. a common method is invoked with false parameters a lot, since this could hint at inconsistencies or missing documentation.
@lispi314 @tess @publius @mhoye
A little more complicated, more a thought experiment:
Every time a compiler (anywhere in the world) stumbles and falls over a line, log that somewhere centrally.
If compiling succeeds later, log also if and how the offending line has been changed.
Then, combine the most common(?) or most unsimilar looking(hello Levenshtein) lines and solutions and show some of them to the user (in case a compile fails).