On 2021-09-28, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 28 Sep 2021, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 18:26 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default > >> setting, > >> (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, > >> (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. > >> > >> So, maybe change einfo from [--] to [II]? > > > Nah, the whole point is to avoid letters since it's not very > > important. > > Alternatively to '[--]' I could make it look down '[..]' or maybe even > > without eyes entirely '[ ]'. > > Yeah, anything but [--]. The version with the dots is nice.
I think any change from only-color would be an improvement; mgorny's first version looks nice. I can see why symmetry with Xorg EE, WW, etc. has an appeal but also the downsides of a) since things don't actually line up 1:1 it could be misleading to try; b) it's also somewhat language-biased. Something a lot of tools have started doing is [?] prefixes to their output; I don't know if there's even a semi-formal spec on it, but what seems to me to map well would be: [!] fatal error (die / eerror?) [*] important but nonfatal (ewarn?) [+] info, maybe memorable, but not harmful (elog?) [.] status/verbose message (einfo?) Could double that if preserving a 4-char-wide tag is preferred. That doesn't cover all needed, like eqawarn, but there are more to choose from. It's unfortunate that many of these are regex metacharacters, making slightly more (human) overhead when grepping, but we already have that with the [] delimeters. > > or maybe even without eyes entirely '[ ]'. For no reason I can articulate, the empty one bugs me. I would get over it though ;) Thanks, -- Hank Leininger <hl...@korelogic.com> 9606 3BF9 B593 4CBC E31A A384 6200 F6E3 781E 3DD7
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
