[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Quoting Bob Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >>Rolf Huehne wrote: >> >> >>>In general the behaviour of Jmol in command-line mode is not very unix-like: >>> >>>1) Usually the output is send to "STDOUT" and the error or log messages >>>are send to "STDERR". This allows for an easy separation of real output >>>and other messages and simplifies output parsing. >>>So I would expect that something like "syntax ok" or "syntax not ok" >>>would be the output with the command-line switch "-c". >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>Since you can set the log level to anything you want, we have log >>messages going to STDOUT. Should they really go to STDERR? >> >> >> > >Yes, in my opinion (at least if Jmol is used non-interactively). Jmol >is getting increasingly suitable for non-interactive tasks (enhanced >scripting language, Jmol math, increasing report and export >capabilities, etc.). But this is counteracted by mixing "real output" >with status/warning/error messages. It is often extremely difficult or >even impossible to sort out the "real output" reliably after it was >mixed (and requires a lot of extra work). Switching all these messages >off is not an alternative because they are especially important for >automatic program use. Without them it cannot be judged >(automatically) if the program run was succesful or not. > > > We should definitely look into this. It might not be trivial to dissect out what is going to log and what is going to output. But we might make that distinction if we wanted to say that only certain very specific commands like PRINT or SHOW or GETPROPERTY or would go to sysout and everything else would go to syserror. It's a bit tricky, because we originally intended syserror to be for exactly that -- errors -- not simply log output. So I'm not sure in the normal course of operation we want informational messages going to syserror.
within Jmol the distinction has to do with what goes to the Jmol console (messages and errors) and what goes to the Java console. (errors and log info) >Q: What do others think about this? > > > >>>2) The silent option unfortunately (and unexpectedly) makes Jmol totally >>>silent. Usually such an option is used to suppress any commenting or >>>warning messages but not the requested output. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>TOTALLY silent. Right. >> >> >> > >It might be ambiguous, but "silent" as command-line option usually >means "work silently" and not "don't work at all". > > > Oh, it works -- just doesn't produce output. So, for example, when producing JPG output with the write JPG command, or dumping data with the write VAR command or now POV-Ray output to files. That sort of thing all works. It really means "work silently". Bob >Regards, >Rolf > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. >Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. >Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. >Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ >_______________________________________________ >Jmol-users mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users > > -- Robert M. Hanson Professor of Chemistry St. Olaf College Northfield, MN http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr If nature does not answer first what we want, it is better to take what answer we get. -- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Jmol-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
