On 12/12/2014 04:19, Peter Gammie wrote:
On 11 Dec 2014, at 19:26, Ian Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:52:36 -0600, Peter Gammie
<[email protected]> wrote:
Peter> Me neither. Hide it under a flag? Or are you (and Makarius)
Peter> suggesting that I hand-roll my own REPL? (I’m not adverse to
that Peter> either.)
FWIW, I have hacked Stefan’s SML mode to understand PolyML error
messages.
Yes, I should have been clearer: this is not (just) about the emacs
sml-mode but the generic emacs “compile” machinery. The latter could
be educated to understand Poly/ML’s warnings and errors, or Poly/ML
could conform to some “standard”. I was sounding David out about the
latter, and also about Poly/ML’s REPL.
I'm sorry I gave the wrong impression in my earlier comment. By saying
that I thought the approach was "rather old fashioned" I was trying to
say that I felt there was now the scope to do more than simply parse
text error messages. I wasn't trying to imply anything about emacs itself.
I seem to recall that the current format of error messages was designed
to be parsed by emacs but probably as long ago as the 1980s. I have no
objection at all to changing the format to something more appropriate.
It probably needs no more than a change to the bit of code around line
443 in basis/FinalPolyML.sml that assembles a text error message from
the location information. If you want to experiment and send me a patch
that works for you I'm happy to look at it.
David
_______________________________________________
polyml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
