Re: [PATCH] gwl/ui: Check for log-events configuration

[Olivier Dion]

On Mon, 06 Jun 2022, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
> Olivier Dion <olivier.dion@polymtl.ca> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 04 Jun 2022, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>>> Olivier Dion <olivier.dion@polymtl.ca> writes:
>>>
>>>> Some GWL sub-commands such as `graph' do not accept a log event 
>>>> configuration.
>>>> This results in returning `#f' from `(%config 'log-events)'
>>>
>>> I don’t understand how this leads to a problem.  Do any of the features
>>> of “graph” use “log-event”?
>>
>> Yes.  `load-workflow' -> `load-workflow*' -> `load*' -> `log-event 'info
>> "Loading workflow file"'.
>
> I see.
>
> Does it make sense to support the --log-events option on “graph”?  Or
> should we just work around it in the log-event procedure?

I think that in all cases, the default of `(%config 'log-events)' should
be '() like you proposed.  In that way, if new commands are added in the
future, this undesired behavior won't re-surface.

As for adding the `--log-events` option to the `graph' command.  The
thing is that the output of the graph is printed on stdout.  Adding
log-event would add an extra step in order to separate the logs from the
desired output.  Thus, I think that if we do that, we also need to add a
`--output=DOT' option for redirecting the graph's output away from the
terminal.

WDY?

-- 
Olivier Dion
oldiob.dev