From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: M-x compile for different file extensions Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 12:59:39 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200210200000.g9K00B5d021923@beta.mvs.co.il> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035133474 19379 80.91.224.249 (20 Oct 2002 17:04:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 17:04:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 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 183JVA-00052P-00 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:04:32 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 183KOe-0004zj-00 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:01:52 +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 183JRR-0000nK-00; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:00:41 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 183JQV-0007L3-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 12:59:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 183JQS-0007Bn-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 12:59:42 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 183JQR-00079v-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 12:59:39 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 183JQR-0005QH-00; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 12:59:39 -0400 Original-To: ehud@unix.mvs.co.il In-reply-to: <200210200000.g9K00B5d021923@beta.mvs.co.il> (ehud@unix.mvs.co.il) 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:8595 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:8595 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? 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? Sometimes I think that compile.el should use comint and you should be able to send input to the compiler just by typing a line ending in RET. 5. Run some commands with interactive input to them (when needed) in a compilation window, with an option to kill the compilation buffer. (`compile-commands', read the help carefully). Why is this better than using a single shell command string, with `;' and `sleep N' used as needed between the individual shell commands?