Graham Percival-3 wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 02:29:05AM -0800, -Eluze wrote: >> >> lilypond-4 wrote: >> > This is deliberate to avoid misunderstandings in environments like >> > frescobaldi and related "lilypond IDEs". You'll note that we create >> > the .pdf even though it reports an error. >> >> unbelievable! and even fatal! >> >> that's the wrong way around - do you believe anybody is going to check >> the >> log anymore? > > huh? > > If we *don't* display an error, nobody on windows or osx is going > to check the log. That's precisely why we show an error, so that > GUI programs will (hopefully) direct the user's attention to that > log. > > What's the big deal? If this bothers you, just make sure you > write the correct version numbers. If you only use 2.14.0 syntax, > then write 2.14.0 instead of 2.15.26. >
the word error should be reserved for severe situations, there are other words to direct the attention to such discrepancies. for the actual "error" a pointer, a note or another kind of message would suffice. I often compare the result of the newest version with an older one and to do that I would always have to change the version number. and I also have an own environment which after compilation checks the log for errors and warnings in different languages. if such are found the log is displayed instead of the pdf/png. so it would be nice to keep the words "error" and "warning" associated with serious matters! cheers Eluze -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Issue-2214-in-lilypond%3A-%22fatal-error%22-reported-when-version-is-too-old-but-correct-output-is-still-generated-tp33125536p33129135.html Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond