From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Discussion for %display-auto-compilation-messages (and --no-auto-compilation-messages option) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:58:44 +0100 Message-ID: <87r45qov0b.fsf@pobox.com> References: <53125A46.3010407@gmail.com> <87a9d8tib7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395781133 9679 80.91.229.3 (25 Mar 2014 20:58:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:58:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 25 21:59:02 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WSYR4-0006zY-HT for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:59:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44207 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSYR4-0006tV-4e for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:59:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54507) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSYQx-0006pq-BA for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:59:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSYQq-0003vv-HX for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:58:55 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:63757 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSYQq-0003vh-Do; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:58:48 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86A211281; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:58:47 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=191SDDswgKJA y7jxfe2WVIojQ00=; b=IwbjhgdF9Yb6COd9Qdl+Lr8vQHzHp/1+NRHQ0P232gUI fCW7g0vi0zgm5veXRBvf+BFqF454RjnRBw4j3/U8LfLS2JCPe6su/RZu2icwVxxS MAga6VrJGs6e5lQc5AYHlF0kjqoJh0CtGCR1j5ULoDF/c86skdTSDnmRS8RgnOs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=bPlGsA D3ZrWOjDX2nYOumjVIgrMRgBBAku5Wbp4PuPRTWx6lP+58l1FLGEYOk/b6FAxDX4 2Y47T9qFYXqu3b6voSypLYZ7oN3gIZ+g9BnEKGjajtFDpUOJBcstMAKn0eikoNqp NKK1B2nOrNXsfD20UDuw+ydiTiCynhCeWW68E= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D3711280; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:58:47 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from badger (unknown [88.160.190.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 456771127F; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:58:47 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87a9d8tib7.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sun, 02 Mar 2014 22:13:48 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4256442E-B460-11E3-9179-873F0E5B5709-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 208.72.237.25 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:17016 Archived-At: On Sun 02 Mar 2014 22:13, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > FWIW, I think the approach should rather be to have a special port (a > fluid) for such things, say, =E2=80=98current-notification-port=E2=80=99.= We=E2=80=99d simply > replace scm_current_error_port by scm_current_notication_port above. Isn't that the same as current-warning-port? I thought this was one of the use cases for current-warning-port :) Andy --=20 http://wingolog.org/