Re: [Caml-list] modified error messages for ocamlc

[Jonathan Protzenko <jonathan.protzenko@gmail.com>]

The OCaml mode for emacs that's distributed along with the OCaml 
sources contains (caml.el) :

 796 ;; Newer emacs versions support line/char ranges
 797 ;; We will adapt OCaml to output error messages in a compatible 
format.
 798 ;; In the meantime we add the new format here in addition to the 
old one.
 799 (defconst caml-error-regexp-newstyle
 800   "^[ A-\377]+ \"\\([^\"\n]+\\)\", line \\([0-9]+\\), char 
\\([0-9]+\\) to line \\([0-9]+\\), char \\([0-9]+\\):"
 801   "Regular expression matching the error messages produced by 
ocamlc/ocamlopt.")

So there are provisions already in the Emacs mode for parsing 
multi-line error formats. What refrains us from  switching directly to 
the format that's recognized by the already-distributed Caml mode ?

Cheers,

jonathan

On Sun 14 Apr 2013 07:57:36 PM CEST, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
> Le dimanche, 14 avril 2013 à 18:06, Gabriel Scherer a écrit :
>>>> Would there be any interest in me making the change everywhere and submitting it as a patch?
>>>
>>> Not at all...
>> I'm not sure if this is a language barrier thing, or sarcasm/irony
>> that got lost on the wire,
>
> No, it was a true answer, I'm not interesting in having changes introduced in ocaml that break features that are useful to me *every* day. Namely the ability of compilation-mode to precisely hilight the span of an error in my source, without having to tweak my .emacs. (That's said I'd have nothing against an implementation of gnu's standard).
>
>
>> On a related note, I have put in
>> http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=5044 some hooks for Emacs
>> compile-mode to parse additional error messages that are not supported
>> by default, namely the backtrace format and the location printed in
>> the 'assert false' error message.
>
> I still don't understand your issue here. For me everything works pefectly out of the box, character ranges included (or maybe I never fell on a specific case ?).
>
>> This is so convenient that I often
>> feed "ocamlbuild test.byte && ./test.byte" as my compilation command
>> in my edit-compile-test cycles.
>
> Yes, that's also what I do.
>
> Best,
>
> Daniel
>
>
>