It's hard to believe that more and more compiler writers realise that language lawyering alone isn't going to improve anything but runtime on an unchanging set

It's hard to believe that more and more compiler writers realise that language lawyering alone isn't going to improve anything but runtime on an unchanging set of microbenchmarks. I still remember the bad old GCC 4.x error messages and those defending them explaining why they should stay like this despite a single template error easily filling ten unintelligible screen pages. When clang was new users switched to it just for the error messages and promises not to fuck them over too hard e.g. start exploiting that signed integer overflows are "ackchyually undefined". Which is of course correct, but not what users complained about. They complained that what they considered a bugfix release broke code because the defaults changed and -fwrapv didn't even catch all the cases that used to compile to what the user needed/expected.