OK. But if we rename the function, why not simply terminal_width() ? FX
> Le 6 déc. 2014 à 23:14, Tobias Burnus <bur...@net-b.de> a écrit : > > This patch fixes a Fortran diagnostic "regression". > > With the current common diagnostic, the width shown with caret diagnostic is > determined by: > > case OPT_fmessage_length_: > pp_set_line_maximum_length (dc->printer, value); > diagnostic_set_caret_max_width (dc, value); > > plus > > diagnostic_set_caret_max_width (diagnostic_context *context, int value) > { > /* One minus to account for the leading empty space. */ > value = value ? value - 1 > : (isatty (fileno (pp_buffer (context->printer)->stream)) > ? getenv_columns () - 1: INT_MAX); > > if (value <= 0) > value = INT_MAX; > > context->caret_max_width = value; > } > > where getenv_columns looks at the environment variable COLUMNS. > > Note that -fmessage-length= applies to the error message (wraps) _and_ the > caret diagnostic (truncates) while the COLUMNS variable _only_ applies to the > caret diagnostic. (BTW: The documentation currently does not mention COLUMNS.) > > On most terminals, which I tried, COLUMNS does not seem to be set. In > Fortran, error.c's get_terminal_width has a similar check, but additionally > it uses ioctl to determine the terminal width. > > I think with caret diagnostics, it is useful not to exceed the terminal width > as having several "empty" lines before the "^" does not really improve the > readability. Thus, I would propose to additionally use ioctl. Which rises two > questions: (a) Should the COLUMNS environment variable or ioctl have a higher > priority? [Fortran ranks ioctl higher; in the patch, for backward > compatibilty, I rank COLUMNS higher.] (b) Should ioctl be always used or only > for Fortran? > > Comments? > > Tobias > <diag.diff>