bug#17826: 24.4.50; compile.el: gcc-include is now all INFO, not WARNING

bug#17826: 24.4.50; compile.el: gcc-include is now all INFO, not WARNING

[Dima Kogan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 817 bytes --]

The attached patch changes the gcc-include type of "M-x compile" to be
INFO. Let's say I have 3 source files:

a.c:
#include "a.h"

a.h:
#include "b.h"

b.h:
asdf;


Clearly trying to compile a.c fails since b.h has an error. I do M-x
compile, and build with "gcc -c -o a.o a.c". I get a *compilation*
buffer with

 -*- mode: compilation; default-directory: "/tmp/" -*-
 Compilation started at Sat Jun 21 01:43:01

 gcc -c -o a.o a.c
 In file included from a.h:1:0,
                  from a.c:1:
 b.h:1:1: warning: data definition has no type or storage class [enabled by default]
  aadsf;
  ^

 Compilation finished at Sat Jun 21 01:43:01


Prior to this patch the line that contains "from a.h:1:0," was seen as
INFO and the line that contains "from a.c:1:" was seen as a
WARNING. This patch makes them both INFO.



[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-gcc-include-compilation-lines-are-now-INFO-now-WARNI.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1745 bytes --]

From 1a7756577d2c6bdeae0d9cea0098ed3b388b8036 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dima Kogan <dima@secretsauce.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 01:32:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] gcc-include compilation lines are now INFO, now WARNING

This patch changes the gcc-include type of "M-x compile" to be
INFO. Let's say I have 3 source files:

a.c:

a.h:

b.h:
asdf;

Clearly trying to compile a.c fails since b.h has an error. I do M-x
compile, and build with "gcc -c -o a.o a.c". I get a *compilation*
buffer with

 -*- mode: compilation; default-directory: "/tmp/" -*-
 Compilation started at Sat Jun 21 01:43:01

 gcc -c -o a.o a.c
 In file included from a.h:1:0,
                  from a.c:1:
 b.h:1:1: warning: data definition has no type or storage class [enabled by default]
  aadsf;
  ^

 Compilation finished at Sat Jun 21 01:43:01

Prior to this patch the line that contains "from a.h:1:0," was seen as
INFO and the line that contains "from a.c:1:" was seen as a
WARNING. This patch makes them both INFO.
---
 lisp/progmodes/compile.el | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/compile.el b/lisp/progmodes/compile.el
index 000d719..ea2bfc4 100644
--- a/lisp/progmodes/compile.el
+++ b/lisp/progmodes/compile.el
@@ -226,8 +226,8 @@ of[ \t]+\"?\\([a-zA-Z]?:?[^\":\n]+\\)\"?:" 3 2 nil (1))
     (gcc-include
      "^\\(?:In file included \\|                 \\|\t\\)from \
 \\([0-9]*[^0-9\n]\\(?:[^\n :]\\| [^-/\n]\\|:[^ \n]\\)*?\\):\
-\\([0-9]+\\)\\(?::\\([0-9]+\\)\\)?\\(?:\\(:\\)\\|\\(,\\|$\\)\\)?"
-     1 2 3 (4 . 5))
+\\([0-9]+\\)\\(?::\\([0-9]+\\)\\)?\\(?:\\([:,]\\|$\\)\\)?"
+     1 2 3 (nil . 4))
 
     (ruby-Test::Unit
      "^[\t ]*\\[\\([^\(].*\\):\\([1-9][0-9]*\\)\\(\\]\\)?:in " 1 2)
-- 
2.0.0

bug#17826: 24.4.50; compile.el: gcc-include is now all INFO, not WARNING

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Dima Kogan <dima@secretsauce.net> writes:

> The attached patch changes the gcc-include type of "M-x compile" to be
> INFO. Let's say I have 3 source files:
>
> a.c:
> #include "a.h"
>
> a.h:
> #include "b.h"
>
> b.h:
> asdf;
>
> Clearly trying to compile a.c fails since b.h has an error. I do M-x
> compile, and build with "gcc -c -o a.o a.c". I get a *compilation*
> buffer with
>
>  -*- mode: compilation; default-directory: "/tmp/" -*-
>  Compilation started at Sat Jun 21 01:43:01
>
>  gcc -c -o a.o a.c
>  In file included from a.h:1:0,
>                   from a.c:1:
>  b.h:1:1: warning: data definition has no type or storage class [enabled by default]
>   aadsf;
>   ^
>
>  Compilation finished at Sat Jun 21 01:43:01
>
> Prior to this patch the line that contains "from a.h:1:0," was seen as
> INFO and the line that contains "from a.c:1:" was seen as a
> WARNING. This patch makes them both INFO.

I think this makes a lot of sense, and I've tried the patch, and it
fixes this problem.  Does anybody object to making both those "included"
lines INFO instead of having one of them WARNING?

(The practical effect here is that `next-error' will skip INFO lines by
default.)

> -\\([0-9]+\\)\\(?::\\([0-9]+\\)\\)?\\(?:\\(:\\)\\|\\(,\\|$\\)\\)?"
> -     1 2 3 (4 . 5))
> +\\([0-9]+\\)\\(?::\\([0-9]+\\)\\)?\\(?:\\([:,]\\|$\\)\\)?"
> +     1 2 3 (nil . 4))

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#17826: 24.4.50; compile.el: gcc-include is now all INFO, not WARNING

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> I think this makes a lot of sense, and I've tried the patch, and it
> fixes this problem.  Does anybody object to making both those "included"
> lines INFO instead of having one of them WARNING?
>
> (The practical effect here is that `next-error' will skip INFO lines by
> default.)

There was no response, so I've now gone ahead and applied the patch.
(I've not re-tested the test case since last year, but there doesn't
seem to have been many changes in this area since then, so I'm guessing
that this won't be a problem.)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no