Re: Flymake backends

[Ergus <spacibba@aol.com>]

Hi Philip:


On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 07:17:08PM +0000, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
>Ergus <spacibba@aol.com> writes:
>
>
>There has been an attempt at abstracting over the current API in this
>project: https://github.com/mohkale/flymake-collection
>

Thanks for replying. I am looking the flymake-collection project and I
think that this is the kind of api we should offer to the user for
applications development. Even that one or a simplified version of that.

But sadly the project is not in elpa... so what should we do for that?


>> Because there are multiple functions the flymake code to simplify common
>> tasks, but they are intended for private use cases.
>>
>> It may simplify integration with other build systems like ninja or
>> cmake.
>>
>> So far something like flymake-quickdef, may help...
>>
>> 2) Is it desirable to add built-in backends to flymake for common/simple
>> tools generally available like cppcheck, flake and so on... to improve
>> the default experience and minimize configuration?
>
>I think that is of interest.  In Emacs 29 shellcheck was added for
>instance, and I don't see why other systems shouldn't be supported
>either (setting aside legal issues).
>

Then I think we should first provide a simpler api that we can maintain
better (i.e. bring functions like flymake-collection-define-rx to
vanilla)

And then we can make a list of the common backends we can support:

So far we only need to give a look to the backends supported by flycheck.

>> Best,
>> Ergus