3 ms·

Not entirely of the same vein, but this C++ stacktrace bomb is one of my favourites: struct x struct z<x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(x(y,x(y><y*,x(y*w>v<

• colejohnson66 6y ago
  How is this supposed to work?
  • phoe-krk 6y ago
    Try compiling it. The compiler will scream at you for a long long time. Also see https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/1956/generate-the-longest-error-message-in-c https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/1956/generate-t...
    • colejohnson66 6y ago
      Ah. I was confused by your usage of the word "stacktrace" which, to me, means an exception stack trace, not an error message. For those curious: $ g++ test.cpp 2>&1 > /dev/null | wc -l 10223622 Ten million lines.
      • phoe-krk 6y ago
        Wasn't "my" usage per se since I'm not the original comment author, but yes, I too find this term confusing in this context. A stack trace to me usually means a textual dump of a call stack printed from some point of the program execution (usually an error site and/or a breakpoint), not compiler output that contains no information about the compiler's runtime stack.
        • Sharlin 6y ago
          In this case the error message contains information about the compiler's template instantiation stack which is rather analogous to the stack trace of a recursive function. But yeah, a somewhat nonstandard usage.
        • gpderetta 6y ago
          I would say that 'stacktrace' is appropriate. The template expansion machinery is pretty much a purely functional language and the compiler is the interpreter. The stacktrace in this case is not of the interpreter itself but of the program being executed. In fact understanding that template error messages are none other than execution stack traces is key to making sense them.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]