Roland Kuhn wrote:
> Philip, you’ve made your point many times now, and I am pretty
> certain that everybody has understood it.
Unfortunately it would seem that Arthur had not. You will, I am sure, be
aware that I had not pursued the topic for some time until Arthur
elected to join the
Hi,
I believe there has been some misunderstanding here that I'd like to try
to clear up.
Personally, I think that the exit code policy of TeX is good. IMO, exit
codes should be (and are) used to report fundamental errors (such as
"program not found" or "I don't understand this input"), not for
Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
> Of course they can /know/: by inspecting the log file. It contains
> the exact transcript of the TeX run, and thus reflects all of TeX's
> knowledge about what happened when compiling the file; as far as
> overfull \hbox'es, etc. are concerned.
Augmented by anything
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:58:34PM +, Philip Taylor wrote:
> The key point is this : only *TeX (where *TeX is any derivative
> of TeX; I do not wish to suggest modifying TeX itself out of respect for
> Don's wishes) /knows/ whether (e.g.,) an overfull \hbox has been
> generated during
On 2016-03-17 at 23:58:34 +, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
>
> Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
>
> > Phil assumed that scanning the log file is time consuming and
> > thus suggested configurable exit values. But as Zdeněk already
> > pointed out, scanning the log file is not time consuming at
