-1 There are common idioms that rely on the current behavior, so I think this would break a lot code.
Examples: In command line programs, it is very common to use "error" for printing the usage message. Many programs use "error" as a general way to exit from pure code with a message. I'm not commenting about whether or not those are good practice, just reporting that they are out there. I would be in favor of this though if it is off by default and is turned on by an option or pragma. But not just -Werror, though, except for messages that would otherwise have been prefixed by "Warning", like the current behavior. Thanks, Yitz On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Konstantine Rybnikov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > I'm bringing this up once again. Can we add "Error:" in the output of an > error in a similar way ghc shows "Warning:" for warnings? Main reasoning is > that, for example, on a build-server, where you have lots of cores to build > your program, if you get an error, it gets lost somewhere in the middle of > compiler's output in all other "Warning" messages you get, since error is > not always shown last on multi-core build. > > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
