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>
