On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 11:28 AM, stefano franchi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Scott Kostyshak <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 12:57 PM, stefano franchi >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On Oct 4, 2014 9:54 AM, "Jürgen Spitzmüller" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> stefano franchi wrote: >> >> > > Both cannot. The command line simply allows you to ignore the error >> >> > > with >> >> > > whatever visible or invisible consequences this has. LyX does not >> >> > > let >> >> > > you >> >> > > get >> >> > > away with it. The error needs to be fixed anyway. >> >> > >> >> > I understand that, but why is this? >> >> >> >> Why not? >> > >> > Sorry my message got truncated. What I meant to say was: >> > Why does LyX fail compilation when programs like kile are able to >> > continue >> > past the error? It does not seem to be a technical constraint but a >> > conscious decision. >> > >> > I understand that the error will need to be fixed sooner or later. But >> > in >> > some tricky cases (like this one) the error may hard to find. Indeed I >> > have >> > already spent four hour bisecting my document and I haven't pinned it >> > down >> > yet. As I keep looking, my only choice to keep working on the content is >> > to >> > export to latex and compile from command line or form mile. Wouldn't it >> > be >> > better to emulate the latter behavior in LyX? Unless I'm wrong about the >> > technical constraints, of course. >> >> The answer to "Why?", as Jürgen stated, is that it is important that >> the user knows that there is an error so that the error can be fixed >> as soon as possible. It would be irresponsible of LyX not to make sure >> you know that a command failed. You might think then that we could >> just issue a warning, but I don't think things are that simple (as a >> permanent LyX solution). For example, if a document is exported from >> LyX on the command line, the warning is shown but there is a non-zero >> exit code so such a user might not realize there is a problem. >> > > Scott, > > I agree with you and Jürgen on the need to show that there has been an > error. I just think LyX could show a warning and (try to) continue. > That's why I mentioned the Latex editor Kile, whose behavior (as far as > LaTeX compilation goes) is functionally equivalent to LyX. > I can create a miniscript to take care of all the needed steps > (latex/biber/latex/latex/indy, etc) and let it run to completion, pretty > much they way LyX does it. I do get the error in the console, but Kile does > not stop compiling and I get my pdf file at the end. > > Anyway, good idea to create a feature request. I see there is already one, I > will add to that.
Good. Hopefully we can have a solution that works for everyone. >> Off topic, this is an example of why versioning is useful. I use git >> and whenever I come across such a complicated issue, I just look at >> the differences between my current revision and the last "good" >> revision. >> > > I use git as well, but it didn't help this time. I guess there is a real > issue with text-versioning, actually. Unless you commit every time you > complete a paragraph, it does not help very much in debugging this kind of > issues. Perhaps a time-based automatic versioning system would help. I guess > it could be easily added on top of git, although it pretty much runs against > its philosophy. I have had a feature in mind that I thought would be interesting, which would save a version whenever your compilation succeeds. So you could always roll back to the last time you successfully produced a PDF. This of course would rely on you compiling often, which is not the case for many users. I also have an idea for an attempt at an "automatic bisect". This is far away from implementation though. In any case, I'm glad you got this figured out! Scott
