Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Thursday, 18 May 2017 at 01:52:17 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 at 14:17:41 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: Similarly, what I want to see in the future is highlighting of specific parts of code where the error applies. Fear me. I combined Walter's code with my own to form some kind of Voltron! https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6806 I think the compiler's error design could use a complete overhaul. I'm wondering if it wouldn't be wise to start a new git branch for all changes to error messages. Call it `stderr.experimental` or something cute like that. The idea is that D won't break people's test code that checks error output until a more complete design has been worked out and approved of. I'm not in favor of or against this idea. I just wanted to propose it.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 at 14:17:41 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: Similarly, what I want to see in the future is highlighting of specific parts of code where the error applies. Fear me. I combined Walter's code with my own to form some kind of Voltron! https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6806
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 14:07:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6777 It turned out to be unexpectedly easy to implement. Nice. But color highlighting should always be configurable (otherwise it's half done), because there are a lot of people who like colors, but can't distinguish between certain color combinations, because of a color disability. Or they might have poor displays or viewing conditions etc. I guess this should be simple to add, just output the colors into an .ini file and read them back if the file exists.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 at 15:38:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It includes DOS and Windows consoles. Only under specific circumstances. On the VGA hardware, underline shares a bit with blue and needs a register tweaked to make it visible (the default 16 color VGA text mode does NOT display the underline), and only worked on CJK multibyte output on Windows 2000 through Windows 10. Only recently, with the one of the updates to windows 10, was console underlining added to Windows for English text, as part of their Linux terminal compatibility flag (see: ENABLE_VIRTUAL_TERMINAL_PROCESSING). Then yours is a unique snowflake, as it's standard for VT-100 emulation (xterm). It isn't really unique, rxvt treats it as bold and xterm can have it compiled out. I do recognize the sequence and even set the bit (see: https://github.com/adamdruppe/terminal-emulator/blob/master/terminalemulator.d#L1724 ) but then ignore it on the drawing side since blinking is a pointless distraction. In practice, basic color support is pretty broad and reliable, given you remember that there's a human reading it who can't see poor contrast easily and a large percentage of them cannot reliably tell all colors apart. Underline, however, is not broadly supported by the computer console apis.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/16/2017 8:25 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: It's also possible to use underlining. Yeah, on some systems, but not really on Windows or even all linux terminals. Color has broader support, though you do want to be careful not to *depend* on color either. I've never met an ASCII console that didn't support underlining. This includes the ones I used back in the 1970's, and includes the tty I designed and built myself for a class project. It includes DOS and Windows consoles. Underlining enjoys much broader support than color does. Color became fairly ubiquitous rather late, in 1990 or so. The VT-100 control sequences have effectively replaced all the other ones. > my terminal emulator doesn't support blinking Then yours is a unique snowflake, as it's standard for VT-100 emulation (xterm).
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 08:11:21 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 5/16/2017 7:17 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > > So again it is NOT color that bothers me. It is OVERUSE of color for > > stuff that isn't important to read the message which dilutes the > > meaning of color. It isn't special anymore. > > Perhaps. I know I have some trouble distinguishing code from explanatory > text in error messages, particularly when the code looks like english, as > in: > > error: undefined identifier maybe > > Colorizing code distinguishes it from text. > > The initial color choices I picked are garish on purpose, it's to try > things out. I expect to change it to more muted ones (turn off the > intensity bit at least). It's also possible to use underlining. > > I'm working on the next PR that will auto-detect if Adam is running the > compiler, and will highlight code with blinking text. LOL. Or you could have it just say: "I'm sorry, Adam. I'm afraid I can't do that." :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEu4Iq5KL-Q - Jonathan M Davis
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 at 15:11:21 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: error: undefined identifier maybe Colorizing code distinguishes it from text. What's important there? The generic syntax that you get from a syntax highlighter or the fact that it is the user input? Drawing attention to `maybe` there is a good idea! But that's not because it is syntax highlighted, it is because that's the most important word in the message. (btw I think it already has attention because of its placement, it doesn't need additional color. but the case I keep going back to, function overloading, puts important stuff in the middle of the message and that would be nice to stand out, as long as what's important - the mismatched arguments - are what stand out) It's also possible to use underlining. Yeah, on some systems, but not really on Windows or even all linux terminals. Color has broader support, though you do want to be careful not to *depend* on color either. I'm working on the next PR that will auto-detect if Adam is running the compiler, and will highlight code with blinking text. I'm afraid that won't work, my terminal emulator doesn't support blinking. But if it detected it was me and outputted XML error messages, oh boy, I'd be excited about that! I honestly very much would love xml error messages.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:11:21AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 5/16/2017 7:17 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > > So again it is NOT color that bothers me. It is OVERUSE of color for > > stuff that isn't important to read the message which dilutes the > > meaning of color. It isn't special anymore. > > Perhaps. I know I have some trouble distinguishing code from > explanatory text in error messages, particularly when the code looks > like english, as in: > > error: undefined identifier maybe > > Colorizing code distinguishes it from text. [...] Simpler solution: print the identifier in quotes, e.g.: error: undefined identifier 'maybe' There: instantly clear without needing any colors. T -- LINUX = Lousy Interface for Nefarious Unix Xenophobes.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/16/2017 7:17 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: So again it is NOT color that bothers me. It is OVERUSE of color for stuff that isn't important to read the message which dilutes the meaning of color. It isn't special anymore. Perhaps. I know I have some trouble distinguishing code from explanatory text in error messages, particularly when the code looks like english, as in: error: undefined identifier maybe Colorizing code distinguishes it from text. The initial color choices I picked are garish on purpose, it's to try things out. I expect to change it to more muted ones (turn off the intensity bit at least). It's also possible to use underlining. I'm working on the next PR that will auto-detect if Adam is running the compiler, and will highlight code with blinking text.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 14:07:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6777 It turned out to be unexpectedly easy to implement. The only downside is now we have to rather tediously tweak the error message texts so they use backticks. The next step is Color D... https://github.com/narke/colorForth -=mike=-
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 at 14:04:34 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: With all the complaints about color, note that dmd already has been using color in error messages for years with no complaints My complaint isn't about the presence of color* but rather about the OVERUSE of it. The old way of coloring the message header helps you quickly find the beginning of an error among output spam. It stands out. But now, with color being all over the place, you can't visually scan for it anymore. It loses its special meaning. Similarly, what I want to see in the future is highlighting of specific parts of code where the error applies. Error: No overload for foo(int), candidates are: foo(string); foo(int, string); In my perfect world, `Error` is colored, like it is now, you can scan for it and find that. Then, the first `string` is also highlighted as a mismatch of the overload, and the `int` in the candidate signature is also highlighted as a match of the overload. Then, your eyes can just look for the color and realize which candidate is the best match and immediately see what you're missing. With syntax highlighting though, string and int will be highlighted as types or keywords... which is irrelevant to the issue of matching the correct overload. It stands out, but means nothing. And if everything is colored, yikes, then nothing stands out since you can't even eye scan it at all. So again it is NOT color that bothers me. It is OVERUSE of color for stuff that isn't important to read the message which dilutes the meaning of color. It isn't special anymore. * I did hate it for a while though because the contrast was poor, but I fixed that with some hack to my terminal emulator code to give it a superior adaptive palette. Perhaps tilix's author will want to do this too: mine has a different yellow when printed on white than on black, different blue, different teal. The application outputs the same sequence but my thing is aware of the background and adapts. Even if the application tries to output unreadable stuff explicitly, my terminal emulator won't allow it. Big, big win on my eyes.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/16/2017 1:07 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote: Color is informative to humans, so I'm all for it. I agree with others that it may be hard to please everyone. Is it possible to use the default scheme of the terminal? With all the complaints about color, note that dmd already has been using color in error messages for years with no complaints, and there is this switch: http://dlang.org/dmd-windows.html#switch-color
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 08:08:20 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 04:33:39 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 03:09:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/14/2017 7:44 PM, ketmar wrote:
sorry for being rude,
Then please do not post rude comments. We expect professional
decorum here.
sorry. i never got any money for using D, so i'm certainly not
a professional ('cause professionals are the people which get
payment for their work). sorry again for polluting NG with my
unprofessional writings. i will stop doing that immediately
after this post.
Rude or not, I think ketmar is right...
He may be right that working on something harder like better
error messages for template constraints would be more useful, but
Walter likely needs to work on some easy stuff once in awhile
too, and this colored syntax will help. Git just enabled colored
highlighting of branch commits for git log and I've found it
useful.
I didn't think he was rude- he did say sorry several times in the
original post, expecting this response for his criticism- but
misguided to criticize this change, for not always matching the
user's settings, and to always expect Walter to work on the hard
stuff. Everybody needs to mix in some easy stuff, including
Walter I bet, to stay motivated and get some easy wins.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 05/14/2017 07:07 AM, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6777 It turned out to be unexpectedly easy to implement. The only downside is now we have to rather tediously tweak the error message texts so they use backticks. Color is informative to humans, so I'm all for it. I agree with others that it may be hard to please everyone. Is it possible to use the default scheme of the terminal? I had the good fortune of sitting with Chandler Carruth and other C++ people during dinner here at C++Now. We did talk about error reporting and although it's mostly agreed that clang's errors are a big improvement, Chandler said that no matter how short or informative, people still don't read error messages! I'm not surprised: people are people. (I'm one and proud of it. :) ) According to Chandler, Rust got this right: Apparently, Rust shows the code *first*, then the error message underneath it. Chandler said that this trivial change in error reporting has been transformative and now people are very happy with Rust's error messages. Ali
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 2017-05-15 23:33, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 15:40:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: That's why such needs to be turned into a generic module, instead of constantly being reinvented. What I'm saying is that it IS a generic module... in fact, there's several of them: http://code.dlang.org/search?q=color colorize, consoled, rainbow, and drlutil are all competing in this space. My terminal library (which is also included in the consoled dub package) is another. Now, I don't think you should use a library for this. Basic console color output is trivial and not worth the cost of a dependency (especially not a fat one like mine, which is full-featured console stuff when you just need simple color)... but I also don't think you should add yet another module to do it out there in public. It could be added as a subpackage to the upcoming Dub file [1]. [1] https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6771 -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/15/2017 8:35 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 14:18:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I eventually want to make the console color package into a generic module, it could improve a number of console apps. FYI we already have a few D modules that do console color (among other things) like consoled or my terminal.d. I have console programs that do it, too. That's why such needs to be turned into a generic module, instead of constantly being reinvented.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 14:31:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I'm glad this sparks interest in improving the error message display, this is good. I've been meaning to do this for years... I want overload resolution and template constraints to tell which conditions were passed, failed, and short-circuited. Colorizing them in the output (green for pass, red for fail, default for short-circuited, for example) is one of the candidates ideas I have for concisely displaying that information to the user. Problem is just that the compiler discards those details before it gets to the error message display and keeping it up the call chain is non-trivial (or did, last time I tried to implement it). One thing I have noticed while doing this is how unhelpful many of the error messages are. Indeed, D's error messages are awful and I'd prefer we all spend time improving this more than anything else: make overload and constraint messages readable. Make size errors tell index and length in all cases (compile and runtime). Make inferred attribute errors tell you where and why the inferrence didn't match expectations. And yes, I've written about all this in bugzilla already.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 14:18:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I eventually want to make the console color package into a generic module, it could improve a number of console apps. FYI we already have a few D modules that do console color (among other things) like consoled or my terminal.d.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/15/2017 6:10 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: Suppose I, or someone else, were to write a PR eliminating your syntax highlighting in favor of semantic highlighting - colorizing to add more detail about the error message instead of about the lexer's output. Will you accept it? I'm glad this sparks interest in improving the error message display, this is good. I can't say I'd accept something given the handwavy description, you'll need to create examples of how it would look. One thing I have noticed while doing this is how unhelpful many of the error messages are. Consider the first one in traits.d: error(loc, "size overflow for type `%s`", t.toChars()); What was the size, and what was the maximum size? The compiler has this information, but does not supply it in the message. This is all low hanging fruit that anyone can help with.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/15/2017 1:05 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: I haven't gotten the chance to look at the dmd error messages yet to see how they look, They're a little garish at the moment, but that's just to make sure it's working correctly. I expect to tune it a bit, especially once I fix the console color package to be more useful. I eventually want to make the console color package into a generic module, it could improve a number of console apps.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 14:07:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: The only downside is now we have to rather tediously tweak the error message texts so they use backticks. It also dilutes the meaning of color. I've been wanting to see highlighted matches and failures in overload resolution and constraint checks (this has been on my todo list for a while since every attempt so far has failed; as I'm sure you know, it isn't trivial to implement in the current compiler). Such highlights would now have to compete with unnecessary syntax coloration; you can't visually scan for color anymore since it doesn't mean anything special. Terminal color choices are also painful, though I kinda believe this is the terminal's fault. I ended up doing hacky code in mine to ensure a legible palette, but still, not everyone has done that. Suppose I, or someone else, were to write a PR eliminating your syntax highlighting in favor of semantic highlighting - colorizing to add more detail about the error message instead of about the lexer's output. Will you accept it?
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 04:33:39 UTC, ketmar wrote:
On Monday, 15 May 2017 at 03:09:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/14/2017 7:44 PM, ketmar wrote:
sorry for being rude,
Then please do not post rude comments. We expect professional
decorum here.
sorry. i never got any money for using D, so i'm certainly not
a professional ('cause professionals are the people which get
payment for their work). sorry again for polluting NG with my
unprofessional writings. i will stop doing that immediately
after this post.
Rude or not, I think ketmar is right...
/P
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 2017-05-15 01:17, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: No problem, it could only print out the line if the output is a terminal, same as for how it decides whether to output colors by default. Ah, that would be fine. -- /Jacob Carlborg
[OFF TOPIC] Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 20:09 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > On 5/14/2017 7:44 PM, ketmar wrote: > > sorry for being rude, > > Then please do not post rude comments. We expect professional decorum > here. But in politics lying and being rude is completely the norm. Also, as yet, software development is not a profession. I think "respect for others" and "empathy" are better lines to take. -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/14/2017 7:44 PM, ketmar wrote: sorry for being rude, Then please do not post rude comments. We expect professional decorum here.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Mon, 2017-05-15 at 05:44 +0300, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > […] > sorry for being rude, but this is exactly the example of things > programmers > like to write: fun, quite easy, and absolutely useless. most of the > time it > will be filtered away by ide/editor, and otherwise it is *harder* to > read, > 'cause it will almost certainly not match editor's syntax coloring > settings, > so reader will have to mentally strip the colors first. Also the default colours chosen by the developer usually work well for the them and their (and if you are lucky reviewers) terminal settings and are totally useless for a huge section of using audience (most of whom remain silent for various reasons). Take Git for example. I end up having to run: git … | more to get rid of the colours. The default colours might work for the Git developers but fail dismally for me. I cannot be bothered to get into the detail of how to change the Git colouring so I use more to get rid of it. I like having colours, for exactly the same reason colouring is good in source code editing, they can apply semantic (albeit often syntactic) coding, but all too often the colour choices are dreadful and too difficult to change. Hence all too often I have to: emacs --color=no I still like colouring, it is just that mostly it is done for a given terminal setting, and/or in a way too difficult to change locally. > while much harder task -- showing which exactly template failed in > template > constraint -- is very hard to implement (i tried it, i know it), but > will > immediately benefit *anyone*, and will be really useful. > > i'm not trying to say that you should drop the things you like to > work on, > and switch to the things i like, of course. but this patch, IMO, > doesn't > deserve a dedicated NG post. > > sorry again, i'm frustrated by dmd inability to generate valid .o > file from > completely valid source, so can be harsh today. -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6777 It turned out to be unexpectedly easy to implement. The only downside is now we have to rather tediously tweak the error message texts so they use backticks. sorry for being rude, but this is exactly the example of things programmers like to write: fun, quite easy, and absolutely useless. most of the time it will be filtered away by ide/editor, and otherwise it is *harder* to read, 'cause it will almost certainly not match editor's syntax coloring settings, so reader will have to mentally strip the colors first. while much harder task -- showing which exactly template failed in template constraint -- is very hard to implement (i tried it, i know it), but will immediately benefit *anyone*, and will be really useful. i'm not trying to say that you should drop the things you like to work on, and switch to the things i like, of course. but this patch, IMO, doesn't deserve a dedicated NG post. sorry again, i'm frustrated by dmd inability to generate valid .o file from completely valid source, so can be harsh today.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 23:17:42 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 19:11:32 UTC, Basile B. wrote: Yes +1 for configurable. IDEs already parse and make things clickable. It's not just +1, it's mandatory. If you implement this you must add a new compiler switch. No problem, it could only print out the line if the output is a terminal, same as for how it decides whether to output colors by default. Yes that another option. But maybe my answer was a bit excessive. Let's wait and see how it looks.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 19:11:32 UTC, Basile B. wrote: Yes +1 for configurable. IDEs already parse and make things clickable. It's not just +1, it's mandatory. If you implement this you must add a new compiler switch. No problem, it could only print out the line if the output is a terminal, same as for how it decides whether to output colors by default.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 16:25:36 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/14/2017 9:04 AM, Andre Pany wrote: Thanks a lot. In my opinion these kind of changes are small but have huge impact on the acceptance of a language. I agree. A couple other improvements needed for error messages: In the PR you say that someone with a better color sense ought to choose the default colors. I don't have such a sense myself. But I recognize that as a real task for which help should be sought. Maybe this thread is a good place to get a volunteer?
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 19:11:32 UTC, Basile B. wrote: On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 17:54:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2017-05-14 18:25, Walter Bright wrote: 1. print out the offending line I hope this one will be optional/configurable. I don't think it necessary to print the offending line within an editor/IDE. They usually can already map the error to the offending line. Yes +1 for configurable. IDEs already parse and make things clickable. It's not just +1, it's mandatory. If you implement this you must add a new compiler switch. Can't the IDE remove the line itself if it troubles him? I don't think such a small thing should burden the compiler with a flag just for the sake of a tool.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 17:54:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2017-05-14 18:25, Walter Bright wrote: 1. print out the offending line I hope this one will be optional/configurable. I don't think it necessary to print the offending line within an editor/IDE. They usually can already map the error to the offending line. Yes +1 for configurable. IDEs already parse and make things clickable. It's not just +1, it's mandatory. If you implement this you must add a new compiler switch.
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 2017-05-14 18:25, Walter Bright wrote: 1. print out the offending line I hope this one will be optional/configurable. I don't think it necessary to print the offending line within an editor/IDE. They usually can already map the error to the offending line. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On 5/14/2017 9:04 AM, Andre Pany wrote: Thanks a lot. In my opinion these kind of changes are small but have huge impact on the acceptance of a language. I agree. A couple other improvements needed for error messages: 1. print out the offending line 2. have a clickable link to a more exhaustive explanation on dlang.org Anyone interested in taking either of these on?
Re: DMD now has colorized syntax highlighting in error messages
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 at 14:07:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6777 It turned out to be unexpectedly easy to implement. The only downside is now we have to rather tediously tweak the error message texts so they use backticks. Thanks a lot. In my opinion these kind of changes are small but have huge impact on the acceptance of a language. Kind regards André
