Re: Delayed warnings

[Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at> wrote:

> Fully agreed.  But the same arguments hold for redisplay errors which
> currently pass through add_to_log where they are treated like messages.

Of course there's a hierarchy of "errors": those that the user cannot
do anything about (and should go to *Messages*), those that the user
*must* attend to (and should either interrupt the user or bring Emacs
to a halt), and warnings that inform the user about what he should
do/know, but can be ignored.

I'm mostly concerned about the third kind, specially when they happen
in low-level code, because they are difficult to make (from C) both
visible and, user wishing, easily ignorable. Sending them to
*Messages* is not enough, unless we're going to (pop-to-buffer
"*Messages*") and that's basically duplicating `display-warning' :-)

> What I wanted is a mechanism that handles (and optionally ignores) all
> sorts of errors/warnings which currently can't be issued prominently
> because Emacs is in an inconsistent state.

Which kind of design have you in mind?

    Juanma