Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> For Emacs, all I know was that M-x compile did all that I ever needed.
> But I'm sure it can be extended for unusual "compiler" output as well.
For emacs use M-x compile to build. The default compile command is
"make" but may be modified as desired. To walk through every
* NightStrike wrote on Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 04:12:24AM CEST:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > I can't understand why people do edit-compile-test cycles without having
> > compiler output be post-processed by their editor. It works with all
> > decent unix editors, a
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't understand why people do edit-compile-test cycles without having
> compiler output be post-processed by their editor. It works with all
> decent unix editors, and it's even more comfortable than not having to
* John Calcote wrote on Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:18:48PM CEST:
> Anyway, what I meant was that my
> development cycles are fairly short - I might not get around to
> checking for warnings (by redirecting stdout to /dev/null) for a few
> days, so I might let a few warnings go for a week (or less), if
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> When you want to clean up the warnings (usually something done near
> >>> the end of a development cycle), you simply build with stdout
> >>> redirected to /dev/null when you run make a few times, and you'll
> >>> see
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> John Calcote wrote:
> > Hmmm. I'd have to disagree here. I carefully consider every warning I
> > see, and evaluate whether or not it represents a real problem.
>
> Yes. This strikes me as perfectly sane behavior.
I also agree with this. Using reasonable judgement is a
John Calcote wrote:
> Hmmm. I'd have to disagree here. I carefully consider every warning I
> see, and evaluate whether or not it represents a real problem.
Yes. This strikes me as perfectly sane behavior.
Insisting on warning-free builds is not sane behavior, especially given
just how many comp
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
When Alexandre last commented on a request like this, one comment that
wasn't already mentioned in this thread was this issue: a patch for
nicer output should not cause hugely increased Makefile.in files.
Makefile.in size is an issue for some larger pr
* Robert J. Hansen wrote on Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 06:36:56PM CEST:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
>> To give you a different perspective, I *hate* that format because it
>> hides problems and *makes debugging harder*. I want to see exactly
>> the command that was executed. I want to see the entire command.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Robert J. Hansen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Always build with full warnings enabled. Always clean up warnings as
> > they are introduced. Always keep a warning free build.
> >
>
> Given the wide leeway the C and C++ standards give impleme
Bob Proulx wrote:
To give you a different perspective, I *hate* that format because it
hides problems and *makes debugging harder*. I want to see exactly
the command that was executed. I want to see the entire command. I
don't want to see an abbreviation of the command.
Fortunately, no one i
John Calcote wrote:
> I love this format because warnings and errors are obvious, and yet
> you get enough output per file to tell you that something's going
> on.
To give you a different perspective, I *hate* that format because it
hides problems and *makes debugging harder*. I want to see exact
On 2008-04-11 16:28, John Calcote wrote:
Stefan,
I asked this very question a few years ago on this list.
Interestingly, my examples came not from the Linux kernel build
process, but from Windows builds, which use a similar output format. I
love this format because warnings and errors are obviou
Some work on improving make output (pretty-printing) has been done for
Xerces-C http://xerces.apache.org/xerces-c/
See also this bugreport http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1440
You may want to ask about it on one of the mailing lists
http://xerces.apache.org/xerces-c/mailing-lists.ht
Stefan,
I asked this very question a few years ago on this list.
Interestingly, my examples came not from the Linux kernel build
process, but from Windows builds, which use a similar output format. I
love this format because warnings and errors are obvious, and yet you
get enough output per file t
15 matches
Mail list logo
