From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: stephen@xemacs.org Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gcc.fortran,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs and GFortran Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:39:25 +0900 Message-ID: <87psc911te.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <45462048.8020102@net-b.de> <20061030161402.15694.qmail@web81209.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <19c433eb0610300818g453bba53m241df66d86493e88@mail.gmail.com> <20061031024656.GA10094@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1162272799 2713 80.91.229.2 (31 Oct 2006 05:33:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 05:33:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: fortran@gcc.gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: fortran-return-15339-gcgf-fortran=m.gmane.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Oct 31 06:33:18 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcgf-fortran@gmane.org Original-Received: from sourceware.org ([209.132.176.174]) by ciao.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GemFR-0003vB-Tt for gcgf-fortran@gmane.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 06:33:18 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 25281 invoked by alias); 31 Oct 2006 05:33:16 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 25273 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Oct 2006 05:33:15 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (HELO mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp) (130.158.97.223) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 05:33:13 +0000 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A49751535AF; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:33:10 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 08D5511F240; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:39:27 +0900 (JST) Original-To: Steve Kargl In-Reply-To: <20061031024656.GA10094@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta27) "fiddleheads" (+CVS-20060716) XEmacs Lucid Mailing-List: contact fortran-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Original-Sender: fortran-owner@gcc.gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.gcc.fortran:15309 gmane.emacs.devel:61461 Archived-At: "sk" == Steve Kargl writes: sk> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:59:11AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: sk> > "Fran?ois-Xavier Coudert" writes: sk> > sk> > > Frankly, I strongly prefer the current error formating. sk> I agree with FX. "Prefer"? Me too. But it's not worth giving up the GNU standard error format, which AFAIK only specifies the first line. When there's a widely-used standard in question, "worse is better" if better doesn't conform. This particular standard is respected by more than just Emacs. > Are you aware that gfortran can report errors that span multiple lines? That's irrelevant; there are any number of ways to format arbitrarily complex error information and remain GNU-conforming. With respect to this capability per se, while it sounds like a useful innovation, you'd have to show me an example to convince me that most messages concerning errors that span multiple lines would not benefit greatly from being unpacked into a series of messages explaining line by line what the compiler thinks went wrong. If so, there's very little cost to a simple terse header that conforms to the standard. The readability cost is actually greater for messages that refer to only one line, IMO! Note that gcc does things more powerful than that already, without extending the error syntax standard. For example it will warn about a redefined macro on one line, and then tell you where the original definition was, even in a different file, on the next.