2016-03-13 17:41 GMT+01:00 Philip Taylor <p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk>: > > > Julian Bradfield wrote: > > > Do you have a full list of all possible now-and-future events that > > you might want to flag this way? > > Yes. Anything/everything for which TeX issues a warning, either to the > log file or to the console or both. The TeX source code is so modular > and so well structured that it should be relatively easy to identify > what warnings can be issued. > > > What about LaTeX/Plain TeX/AMSTeX warnings? They can be equally > > important, but I don't think the core *TeX engine knows about them. > > Then there would need to be a further extension that would allow any > package to signal a warning which could be handled in the same way. >
In other words, a new TeX primitive will have to be added. > > > Just wrap *TeX in a script that greps the log file and accepts your > > desired command line arguments. Then only *one* person, namely you, > > has to do the work, and you can make the script available to any > > other front-end authors and maintain it for them. It wouldn't take > > long. > > A "script" in what language ? Each and every front end almost certainly > has its own scripting language, so there is no "one size fits all" > solution when it comes to TeX front ends. But the *TeX engine is common > to all front ends, so it is at this point of commonality that it makes > most sense to make the change. > Nowadays all TeX distros have lua. > > > In terms of programmer efficiency, that's much better than asking > > several different people to hack on C (or whatever language *TeX is > > written in) and maintain consistent lists of possible command-line > > switch values every time you think of a new case you want to detect. > > As observed by several of us, computer time efficiency is irrelevant > > for such trivial tasks as grepping *TeX log files. (Even on a > > decade-old computer, the time to grep a typical log file will be > > measured in a very small number of milliseconds.) > > No "grepping" would be needed if *TeX could be asked to optionally > return a non-zero status if a TeX warning had been issued during the > compilation. TeXworks already searches the log file for errors, > warnings and bad boxes, but only if a non-zero status is returned by the > engine; all I am asking for is for the engine maintainers to help > TeXworks by optionally returning a non-zero status code if a warning had > been issued. > I can imagine the following problems: Overful \hbox Overful \vbox Underful \hbox Uverful \vbox Undefined label Duplicate label Labels have changed Undefined citation Duplicate citation Missing character in a font Now suppose that the document contains 5 overful hboxes, 12 underful hboxes, 4 underful vboxes, 3 undefined labels, 1 duplicate labes, changed labels, 153 missing citation, 52 missing characters. What status should be returned so that I could get this information without looking into the log file? (Yes/No answer might be sufficient without giving the exact numbers.) > > Philip Taylor > Zdeněk Wagner http://ttsm.icpf.cas.cz/team/wagner.shtml http://icebearsoft.euweb.cz > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex >
-------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex