Re: How can I tell guile to shut up? ;)

[Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>]

Hi,

On Thu 30 Jun 2011 23:37, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> skribis:
>
>> After some thinking, the base thing to do is just to add a warning port,
>> and make warnings (non-fatal informative messages) write to that port.
>> I have done this in the attached patches.  Any objections?
>
> Ideally I’d preferred to keep current-warning-port in (system base
> message), but since it’s needed in boot-9, we may have to make it
> global.  Or would the following work?

Yeah I tried to do that, but since it's needed in C (potentially quite
early, even before modules) and in Scheme I just bit the bullet and
added it to the default env.

>  (define-module (guile-user)
>    #:autoload (system base compile) (compile compile-file)
> +  #:autoload (system base message) (%current-warning-port)
>    #:filename #f)

Wouldn't work, because it's needed in (guile), not (guile-user).

> Besides, it would be great if ‘*current-warning-prefix*’ were handled
> consistently, too.  All this could certainly be factorized in a Scheme/C
> function that takes care of using the right port and prefix.

It would, but then you're talking about standardizing a `warning'
function, and that's problematic, as some warnings will have source
locations and others will not, and we already have `warn' in the base
env which has a rest arg so it's not extensible with keywords, etc etc,
and system base message is really about compiler warnings (requiring
source location) and not all warnings, so it's a bit of a mess.  (And
that's not to mention more general logging facilities, with levels and
categories and such.)

Note that it is also possible to prefix all output with soft ports.

Basically I appreciate the concerns but have not found a way to solve
the whole problem nicely, so I kept it simple.  As it seems we agree on
the need for higher-level solutions based on a warning port accessible
in (guile) and C, I'm going to see about committing something along
these lines, and we can work on higher-level warning facilities later.

Regards,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/