<story><title>Improvements to static analysis in GCC 14</title><url>https://developers.redhat.com/articles/2024/04/03/improvements-static-analysis-gcc-14-compiler</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>quincepie</author><text>To me fanalyzer is one of GCC killer features over clang. It makes programming C much easier by explaining errors. The error messages also began to feel similar to Rust in terms of being developer friendly.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mr_00ff00</author><text>I know Rust (esp on HN) is very hyped for its memory safety and nice abstractions, but I really wonder how much Rust owes its popularity to its error messages.&lt;p&gt;I would say the #1 reason I stop learning a technology is because of frustrating or unclear errors.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Getting a bit of topic, but I meant more because I love C and would love it more with rust level error messages.</text></comment>
<story><title>Improvements to static analysis in GCC 14</title><url>https://developers.redhat.com/articles/2024/04/03/improvements-static-analysis-gcc-14-compiler</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>quincepie</author><text>To me fanalyzer is one of GCC killer features over clang. It makes programming C much easier by explaining errors. The error messages also began to feel similar to Rust in terms of being developer friendly.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>chc4</author><text>I have had the exact opposite experience: clang constantly gives me much better error messages than GCC, implementations of some warnings or errors catch more cases, and clang-tidy is able to do much better static analysis.</text></comment>