From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: M-x compile for different file extensions Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:52:49 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200210201952.g9KJqnx12700@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200210200000.g9K00B5d021923@beta.mvs.co.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035143742 21428 80.91.224.249 (20 Oct 2002 19:55:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ehud@unix.mvs.co.il, wgh@askme.ok, henrik+news@enberg.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 183MAm-0005ZQ-00 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:55:40 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 183N4K-0000fy-00 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:53:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 183M8L-0005TE-00; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:53:09 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 183M85-0005RZ-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:52:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 183M83-0005RN-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:52:52 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 183M81-0005RG-00; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:52:49 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9KJqnx12700; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:52:49 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:8599 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:8599 > I have enhanced the Emacs `compile' package with some commands. > > 1. Automatic selection of compile commands according to the file > extension and DEBUG state. (defuns: `compile-main', `compile-sub', > `compile-debug-toggle') > > The debugging feature could make sense, but why isn't `make -k' a good > default regardless of the kind of file? In other words, why isn't > "You should write a proper makefile" a good solution for this? I have missed the orinal post, where was it ? [ was it in gnu.emacs.bug ? My gnu.emacs.bug newsgroup has been empty for a while now. ] > 4. An easy way to interact (send input to) with the compilation process > (`compile-send-to-process'). > > This indeed is something important. > > It is sort of unfortunate that we have the conflict between two > meanings we would like RET to have in the compilation buffer: "visit > the source code for a particular error message", and "send a line of > input". We have used it for the former ever since that convention > existed in Emacs (several years ago), but would it be better to use > it for the latter instead? We could probably let RET do something like (if (eobp) (send-to-process) (goto-error)) Stefan