Re: Fix 1477: Add (ly:expect-warning msg args) to suppress expected warnings (issue 5037046)

[address@hidden]

On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:45 AM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:

> Am Wednesday, 28. September 2011, 09:07:12 schrieben Sie:
>> LGTM
>> 
>> It'd be great to see the regtests run with -dwarning-as-error now that
>> you've done all this work.  Is that possible to incorporate into this
>> patch?
> 
> Actually, I don't think that's a good idea, for several reasons:
> 
> 1) The warning-as-error is currently only implemented in the Input class, not 
> for warnings that are triggered by directly calling (ly:warning...). So we 
> won't catch all warnings anyway.
> 

Is there a way to make it such that they are capture?.

> 2) Setting -dwarning-as-error means that any warning (e.g. a failed 
> barcheck...) will cause a complete failure of the whole regtest build. I 
> think 
> this is way too volatile to be useful. A build should never fail, except for 
> real problems.

I agree, but perhaps warnings like bar, bar number, and octave checks can also 
have a throw/catch mechanism like the one you're implementing here.

> Sometimes, the problems that appear are not so easily and quickly fixed, so 
> that we might have periods of a week where a regtest prints out an undesired 
> warning. Do we really want to hold up all patch testing simply because a 
> warning surfaced in the regtests? 
> I think that's out of proportion.
> 

True, but the whole reason these problems show up in the master branch in the 
first place is because people (including me) accidentally push stuff that 
generates warnings.  If the regtest build failed because of -dwarning-as-error, 
then the warning-generating code would not be pushed (assuming the person is 
not a malevolent pusher and/or lazy).  That's the big advantage I see of using 
-dwarning-as-error for regtests.

Cheers,
MS