Re: current compile.el issues

[Daniel Pfeiffer]

Saluton,

Dave Love <address@hidden> skribis:

> address@hidden (Daniel Pfeiffer) writes:
> 
> > I only have the current Emacs uninstalled, but I can't verify that, with
> > or without -q.  In fact the two variables have the same value by default
> > for me.
> 
> Presumably srcdir == builddir in that case.
> 
> emacs-version
>   => "21.3.50.14"
> data-directory
>   => "/dl/sr/homes/px/fx/esrc/etc/"
> doc-directory
>   => "/scr/emacs-build/etc/"

I don't understand how you get to that.  How can you not build where the
source is?  Anyways, I don't think people need to load this file frequently.
So those few who know how to set up such disparate directory structures, will
be capable of typing the right file name at find-file.

> > I think doing this the same way as scrolling is a good idea, but I
> > can always set this option if it defaults to 0.  This is however the
> > first request since the fringe arrow appeared, so I don't know if
> > many people still want this.
> 
> I don't find the fringe arrow very helpful, especially if there's no
> fringe!  It's also not the behaviour I've been used to for many years.

Well I guess, I'll revert the fringe arrow and do an overlay instead.

> > But I think he means the additional decorative stuff that
> > compilation-mode-font-lock-keywords gives.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > I don't know if these should be customizable,
> 
> I don't understand the purpose of that pattern.  It doesn't seem
> useful and it is distracting when scanning the output -- typically
> every line has a highlighted item.

When building a huge project, it shows you at a glance what make is doing at
that point.  I find this very useful when scrolling through the buffer,
especially when gcc commands get so many options, that they span several
lines.

> I think the rest of the patterns
> are OK.  (I know developers other than gerd don't seem to get the same
> cognitive effects as I do, but I don't find I'm that different from
> most people.)
> 
> > I'm not sure that can be avoided.  One minor point is multiple
> > couldn't see, which message you are visiting.
> 
> I don't know when that's an issue.  Not, as far as I know, with the
> systems I use.  Unfortunately it seems only Stefan and I understand
> this mode of working.

Tha Ada compiler and makepp example show several messages on a line.  Why
wouldn't other people understand that?

> > A major concern would be that the point may be so far from the
> > message that you can't display both in one window at the same time.
> 
> In that case, point probably has to move, but it usually won't be an
> issue.  One could also limit the output from the subprocess if
> necessary.
> 
> > Do you want the comint window to then get split?
> 
> I guess that would be a reasonable solution if it's necessary.

It means at least three windows.  Most commands (except emerge) automagically
create no more than a second window.  So that would sort of be a new
behaviour.

> > And are you only concerned
> > with this for comint, i.e. have a different behaviour for that?
> 
> I was talking specifically about compilation-shell-minor-mode.
> 
> > This could be done with the new next-error-function, which you could
> > set to a save-excursion`ed variant in comint-buffers.
> 
> I've yet to understand what to do with that stuff, now it's changed
> under me again.  If you're supposed to define your own function and
> the minor mode is supposed to redefine it, there's a problem.

I don't understand why this was introduced either.  But if you define your
own, replacing the one the (minor) mode installs, you'd better know what
you're doing ;-)

> >> >  * I still don't know what the proper definition of `informational'
> >> >    messages is, since messages can be highlighted with
> >> >    `compilation-info-face' when compilation-skip-threshold's value is
> >1.> 
> >> I don't understand this.  Maybe Daniel can help.
> >
> > compilation-skip-threshold is just that, i.e. saying what (not) to skip
> > with C-x ` et al.  It has nothing to do with display, i.e. faces.  You may
> > well wan't to normally skip these, but occasionally mouse-2 click on one,
> > to visit it anyways.  You wouldn't know you could, if it weren't
> > highlighted.
> 
> I'm asking what the _definition_ of such messages is.  What the
> patterns highlight isn't consistent with the story was about what
> informational messages are.  It isn't internally consistent either
> since the same sort of warning message from gcc will apparently be
> treated differently from other compilers.  Compare
> 
> foo.c(2:0) : informational EDC0804: Function foo is not referenced.
> /tmp/a.c:2: warning: `foo' defined but not used

Sure the world will never agree on the precise meaning of words.  Nor will
constantly shifting C++ standards.  There's no way I can put semantics into a
regexp.  I just believe the compiler.  But at least I give you a chance to
tune it to your understanding of your compilers.

coralament / best Grötens / liebe Grüße / best regards / elkorajn salutojn
Daniel Pfeiffer

-- 
lerne / learn / apprends / läramå / ucz się    Esperanto:
                              http://lernu.net/