Hi,
Le 09/03/2016 01:18, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
* warning("stop"): i agree that, in order to update all contents and
to be sure that results are reliable and not polluted by
unpredictable "[]+-" side effects, this warning mode will have to
be always activated for a very long period, may be up to Scilab 7.
Then, the problem is that this stopping mode does not resolve the
cause: if an up-to-date package intentionally uses warnings for
anything else than []+, it will be stopped as well.
This warning mode should accept an additional parameter
identifying the type of event (or a series/vector of events) for
which stopping must occur. Shouln't it?
An other solution could be to implement and use a new *warning("trace")
*mode, instead of the rough warning("stop").warning("trace") would
display a warning + the where() or whereami() trace locating where the
warning occurs, /without stopping the execution of the script/.
This has been proposed while CodeReviewing the implementation of
warning("stop"), but has not been retained. Don't know why.
If the intention of warning("stop") (instead of "only warning("trace"))
is to urge and compel users to update their codes, then the
oldEmptyBehaviour flag should not be proposed in the other hand.
BR
Samuel
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
