Re: "notes" mechanism

[Akim Demaille]

Le 28 juil. 09 à 14:19, Joel E. Denny a écrit :

> On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Alex Rozenman wrote:
>
> > 2) Not to see the "warning" word in each sub-message.
>
> I don't see the appeal of that change either, but maybe I've just  
> grown
> accustomed to the current practice.  I just checked gcc 4.2.4, and  
> it also
> prints "warning:" on every submessage.  (Actually, gcc also prints
> "error:" for errors in the same manner.)
>
> Unless there are other practical reasons for these changes, I think we
> need more opinions.  Akim says he'll be back in a couple of weeks.  He
> usually has a better sense of whether it's ok to change long-standing
> practices in Bison.

Some tools that postprocess stderr, such as Emacs' compilation-mode,  
rely on the presence of "warning" to recognize lines that are not  
errors.  It changes the color of the message, which I find a useful  
feature.  And since the GNU Coding Standards do not require "error"  
for error messages, "warning" is really mandatory to be recognized as  
such.

Keeping "warning" on all sub-lines also helps keeping the indentation  
consistent :)