Am 16.04.2016 um 12:42 schrieb Andrew Bernard:
> I have not used any language of complaint, merely observation and
> puzzlement. It was also not I that mentioned it is a regular source of
> confusion. Others do seem to think so.

It is probably the first time this *specific* issue has been reported.
What is regularly irritating is the terminology of "fatal errors".

> As to being the first, I may possibly be the first to write a lilypond
> compile server where I need to understand clearly the error conditions
> to get everything working nicely.
>
> On 16/04/2016, 5:47 PM, "David Kastrup" <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Andrew Bernard <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> writes:
>
>         So gentlemen, since this is a regular source of confusion,
>
>
>     You are the first to have complained.
>
>
>
>
>         As to lilypond making a best effort at producing output, I
>         have never
>         seen this referred to in the NR. That ought to go in
>         somewhere. But
>         for my preference, a serious syntax error which is just outright
>         garbage should in my opinion not produce any output. Other
>         types of
>         compilers would stop.
>
>
>     As does LilyPond.
>
>
> But it does not stop. After the syntax error it still produces the
> output PDF, and states a 'fatal error' happened. Perhaps it could say
> that 'a syntax occurred but I overall I was able to carry on
> regardless in this case’ or something to that effect. I thought the
> common understanding of fatal error means that the program cannot
> continue processing because of it. I am only talking about the
> processing of one file here, as per the submitted MWE, not the
> processing of more than one file on the command line.

I also find it good that LilyPond continues to work because having the
PDF often helps identifying errors.
But I also find it puzzling that LilyPond reports a "fatal error" and
exits with "failed files:". For example when I use the wrong LilyPond
version compared to the \version statement.
Basically what Andrew suggests above seems right to me. There should be
*some* sort of order of severity, like "warning", "serious error",
"fatal error".

Best
Urs

>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Reply via email to