[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs and GFortran
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs and GFortran |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:59:11 +0900 |
"François-Xavier Coudert" <address@hidden> writes:
> I think the current error message format is possible to parse, so it's
> just that people who want to parse it have to write the appropriate
> code.
As Stefan said, standards exist for a reason -- even if Emacs adds the
required patterns to match gfortran's idiosyncratic output format, what
about vim? Or teds-funky-editor which only sees a release every 10
years? Or other tools/utilities which want to semi-parse error output?
It's very hard to make sure every tool knows about every format, so
having at least some minimal standardization _really_ helps.
> Frankly, I strongly prefer the current error formating.
It is not necessary to completely change the format, nor to make it
human unfriendly, merely make sure that key info (filename/line/colum)
is available in a standard form.
I.e., keep the verbose "squishy good for humans" stuff (e.g. showing a
little picture of where the error occurred), but change the numeric info
into a standard form. As Stefan mentioned, the difference seems rather
gratuitous (" In file F:L" versus "F:L:").
I guess the result would look something like:
gfortran hello.F
hello.F:3:
write(*,) 'Hello!'
1
Error: Syntax error in WRITE statement at (1)
[Which works fine with Emacs.]
-Miles
--
I'd rather be consing.
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, (continued)
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Angelo Graziosi, 2006/10/31
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Steve Kargl, 2006/10/31
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Angelo Graziosi, 2006/10/31
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Chong Yidong, 2006/10/31
- Re: Emacs and GFortran, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/10/31
Re: Emacs and GFortran, François-Xavier Coudert, 2006/10/30