From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New Flymake rewrite in emacs-26 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 18:53:27 +0300 Message-ID: <83wp43ov7s.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8760bwz5qf.fsf@gmail.com> <83infw1dkz.fsf@gnu.org> <87efqbb35x.fsf@gmail.com> <831smbqe70.fsf@gnu.org> <87tvz79h0s.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1507650878 17087 195.159.176.226 (10 Oct 2017 15:54:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:54:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: sdl.web@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: joaotavora@gmail.com (=?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?=) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 10 17:54:33 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wrV-0003Kg-Rr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:54:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35739 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wrd-00017S-7L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51386) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wr4-00017L-2m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wqz-0000OB-Ko for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:54:02 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:57011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wqn-0000LV-H9; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:53:45 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2216 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wqm-0007yd-M9; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:53:45 -0400 In-reply-to: <87tvz79h0s.fsf@gmail.com> (joaotavora@gmail.com) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:219341 Archived-At: > From: joaotavora@gmail.com (João Távora) > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, sdl.web@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:09:07 +0100 > > No, I meant generally keep track of the backends that surfaced in this > list and merge them into the relevant major-mode in emacs-26 (in keeping > with your decision that they should be merged if they work reasonably > well). I think yes. > >> * Should Flymake do something with next-error-function? > > > > I thought it already did? > > It doesn't. And I should have said 'next-error' more generally. IIUC the > place for next-error-function is for major modes, which flymake-mode > isn't (but its proposed diagnostics buffer is). I have no problems with Flymake keeping its hands off next-error. But since you've asked the question, it sounds like you are unsure whether it's TRT? > Anyway I think the problem is that next-error will have a hard time (if > it doesn't already) choosing between its "next-error" source: the > compilation, and grep occur buffers, and now the constantly updated list > of Flymake annotations. Yes, we had similar problems elsewhere. > >> * There is a "Flymake diagnostics buffer" sub-feature in > >> scratch/flymake-diagnostics-buffer. It is reasonably stable. Is it > >> OK to merge into emacs-26? > > > > If it's easy to show a diff for such a merge, please do. > > Patch is attached (though I don't really understand if you want to see > the diff or rather ensure that a diff is possible and easy to revert if > problems arise) (I wanted to see the diffs themselves.) Thanks, I think this can be merged to emacs-26. > > It doesn't seem worth the hassle. Most users will be programmers > > anyway. > > Possibly not elisp programmers, but OK. Let's withhold the argument until we have some real problems in this area. IMO, the manual is small enough to host both parts of Flymake documentation without any problem.