Align compiler options to VWXY scheme #12751
Conversation
lrytz
force-pushed
the
vwxy
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b368c22 to
c7d0b75
Compare
|
Let me know if I should do something. I have to say, it's so much easier to find verbose output under -V than trying -help then -X then -Y trying to find the option I need. There is still the issue of "support". History shows that all options are equally ephemeral like all software. |
|
@romanowski I won't be able to get to this for several days so it'd be better if someone else reviewed it. |
| protected def isVerbose(s: Setting[?])(using settings: ConcreteSettings)(using SettingsState): Boolean = | ||
| s.name.startsWith("-V") && s.name != "-V" | ||
| protected def isWarning(s: Setting[?])(using settings: ConcreteSettings)(using SettingsState): Boolean = | ||
| s.name.startsWith("-W") && s.name != "-W" || s.name == "-Xlint" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is only one option of a kind -V and -W each added in this PR. Is it worth creating these two categories? What's the motivation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lets a thousand flowers bloom and still be manageable. https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty/issues/12785
If I want more output merely (not change in behavior), -V is more succinct than checking -X and -Y (which become a long list eventually). Everyone needs -Vprint at some point, not just compiler coders.
(But here, I just wanted to say -Wconf.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another motivation is alignment with Scala 2.
by @som-snytt