|
From: | Akim Demaille |
Subject: | Re: "notes" mechanism |
Date: | Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:05:51 +0200 |
Le 28 juil. 09 à 14:19, Joel E. Denny a écrit :
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Alex Rozenman wrote:2) Not to see the "warning" word in each sub-message.I don't see the appeal of that change either, but maybe I've just grown accustomed to the current practice. I just checked gcc 4.2.4, and it alsoprints "warning:" on every submessage. (Actually, gcc also prints "error:" for errors in the same manner.) Unless there are other practical reasons for these changes, I think we need more opinions. Akim says he'll be back in a couple of weeks. He usually has a better sense of whether it's ok to change long-standing practices in Bison.
Some tools that postprocess stderr, such as Emacs' compilation-mode, rely on the presence of "warning" to recognize lines that are not errors. It changes the color of the message, which I find a useful feature. And since the GNU Coding Standards do not require "error" for error messages, "warning" is really mandatory to be recognized as such.
Keeping "warning" on all sub-lines also helps keeping the indentation consistent :)
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |