2012/3/5 Brad King <brad.k...@kitware.com>: > On 3/5/2012 10:22 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote: >>> >>> Rather than being a conditional version of STATUS I think full stack >>> information is useful for debugging. Add to the cmake::MessageType >>> enumeration a DEBUG value and teach cmake::IssueMessage to handle it. >>> The output should look like an error or warning but with "CMake Debug" >>> as the header instead of "CMake Error" or "CMake Warning". >> >> >> I would like to have that switchable in some way. E.g. for Boost_DEBUG I >> don't have stack traces at the moment, but the contents are the >> information I need. Stacktraces are useful, but not always. > > > I'm not opposed to a switch but extra verbosity rarely hurts debug > output IMO. Even a switch at the call site may be the wrong place > because it is up to the viewer of the message whether the full > context is important. Perhaps the switch can be based on something > similar to the context filters (see below). > > >>> Once the decision to display the message has a cmListFileBacktrace >>> instance available for the context then you can have fancier rules >>> for deciding what messages to display. >> >> >> I don't think I fully understand what you are trying to say here. > > > Elsewhere in this thread discussion proposed filters on messages > based on their context. Filters based on the full backtrace > should be possible and would give a lot of control.
You mean something like a regex? So that if the stacktrace and/or prefix (and/or the whole message) matches the regex it is displayed ? It may cost a lot at runtime? -- Erk Le gouvernement représentatif n'est pas la démocratie -- http://www.le-message.org -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers