From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: native-comp *Warnings* buffer Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 12:23:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87k0o2z9pr.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <83y2chzvxw.fsf@gnu.org> <87czttxquo.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37591"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eric Abrahamsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri May 14 18:59:52 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lhbAG-0009Xw-4j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 14 May 2021 18:59:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41164 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lhbAF-00008l-3D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 14 May 2021 12:59:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52756) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lhabe-0007Ih-EA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 May 2021 12:24:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:13597) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lhabY-000752-T8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 May 2021 12:24:05 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 77A17100216; Fri, 14 May 2021 12:23:58 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EA9051001F4; Fri, 14 May 2021 12:23:56 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1621009436; bh=olS+oFNPKE9XDDPitQqV5r4h9Hh1v3joHEFnuZ57ds8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=EKLOAqeWJrl2k5NXvfcPWp0m+lsbLZXY1esEgphAJhJWGE/Wy20MUXJPkveetYrSh 6Ba/eCuD4Yyp3E9Gziev2/02MoIJ6Cf+8uhDaGkFa41nxeoahooItLUcslGKR5pATo O5x+BicMa1BROQ+ELhqxL7WLM+Icx0XapUYb2gg/9ueGbZ/eyFBRaErUze71ZwDglY anvpGYm8eDynyMxwl/O+OhEYXe/tfH9OPIuTeQoFQfN3FeIn2w6xTpxeaNO/rqqu9V c31Qk9OzbDFdA6VAcDce+AY3tXIM/eMnWgzHztKmEGZmUv2xRl2DUVSydsFT/6m0Ga am6gTL389RQuw== Original-Received: from alfajor (76-10-140-76.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.140.76]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C178E12040E; Fri, 14 May 2021 12:23:56 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87czttxquo.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> (Eric Abrahamsen's message of "Fri, 14 May 2021 08:44:15 -0700") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:269287 Archived-At: > I guess usage. I only see the *Compilation* buffer when I've > done something to ask for it (updating packages, etc), and it's over > relatively quickly. These warnings went on for many long minutes, at > random intervals. I was trying to work in two side-by-side buffers, and > it kept stealing the other one -- I even switched frames once the > *Warnings* buffer was open, but it followed me to the new frame. I think "stealth" compilation performed opportunistically in the background should indeed not display any warnings (by default). > I could do a patch for that, but the existing mechanisms *are* pretty > thorough: big prominent buttons that do exactly what they promise to do > (I'm a bit embarrassed I didn't just read the instructions). Don't those buttons also suppress the warnings for the normal (non-async, non-native) compilation case? If so, we should be careful not to encourage the users to do that when they're only annoyed by the async warnings. Stefan