Python needs better error reporting

[John Baxter]

In article <U2iT8.45587$n4.10825231 at newsc.telia.net>,
 "Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote:

> Tim Peters wrote:
> 
> > > I really DO have a point!
> >
> > Error-reporting in parsers has been the subject of intense
> > research.  Do a little digging and come back when you can
> > make a case that your point can be addressed effectively.
> 
> fwiw, I've seen Lisp advocates argue that this may be
> one of Lisp's greatest advantages...

It probably is now, but it was not so in the early days, when the LISP 
users walked around MIT with a bunch of cards full of right parens.  
They stuck several such cards on the back of the decks they submitted 
with LISP programs.

The then-current batch-procesing LISP interpreter gave no output at all 
in the absence of enough )s. It gave one *something*--often useful--in 
the presence of too many (as it just ignored the excess).  (And 
turn-around was overnight, although the center often did better.) 

  --John (who never understood anything of significance which John 
McCarthy said in my presence)