texexec/context error messages [MkIV] [vim]
G'day, Shouldn't ConTeXt be stopping on "system : module simplefonts not found" instead of stopping on problems appearing only later, e.g. ! Undefined control sequence. <recently read> \setmainfont Shouldn't error messages like the first one be more noticeable? Why doesn't ConTeXt set an exit code when running in --batchmode or --nonstopmode? And, the initial reason for these questions: has anyone figured out an appropriate 'errorformat' for the 'vim' editor, for use with MkIV? The one at http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1925 seems to be working with MkII only... -- -- Rogutės Sparnuotos
On Sun, 23 May 2010, Rogutės Sparnuotos wrote:
And, the initial reason for these questions: has anyone figured out an appropriate 'errorformat' for the 'vim' editor, for use with MkIV? The one at http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1925 seems to be working with MkII only...
Hans, does LuaTeX support -file-line-error flag like pdftex? If so, how do I pass that (context --passon=-file-line-error) does not seem to work. Rogutes, if you want to match system : module * not found Add \%+Asystem\ %#:\ module\ %m\ not\ found, to the error format (it will not jump to the line containing \usemodule[...] because that information is not available in the log file). Aditya
Aditya Mahajan (2010-05-23 13:24):
On Sun, 23 May 2010, Rogutės Sparnuotos wrote:
And, the initial reason for these questions: has anyone figured out an appropriate 'errorformat' for the 'vim' editor, for use with MkIV? The one at http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1925 seems to be working with MkII only...
Hans, does LuaTeX support -file-line-error flag like pdftex? If so, how do I pass that (context --passon=-file-line-error) does not seem to work.
Rogutes, if you want to match
system : module * not found
Add
\%+Asystem\ %#:\ module\ %m\ not\ found,
to the error format (it will not jump to the line containing \usemodule[...] because that information is not available in the log file).
Thanks, Aditya. I hope a 'file-line-error'-like option will turn up eventually :) One more question regarding error reporting: why are invalid parameters to commands _silently_ ignored? 'texexec --verbose' outputs the same, be it run with \setupheads[align=abc123,heads=lotsoff] or with \setupheads[align=center] Since there is no documentation describing the numerous parameters of most of the commands, I think it would be really useful to support the trial and error method by showing as much parsing errors as possible... -- -- Rogutės Sparnuotos
Rogutės Sparnuotos wrote:
One more question regarding error reporting: why are invalid parameters to commands _silently_ ignored?
For speed reasons. Checking the values would be a pretty slow process, so you definitely don't want elaborate tests on a document that is known to be ok. There has been some thought about a special version of context that is slow but does all these tests. Afaik, this has never materialized, I suspect mainly because it is not always that easy to decide what is valid and what is not (some commands delegate key-value parsing to other commands, other commands are themselves generated on the fly). For MkIV, there has been some work done by Luigi on figuring out what commands are actually present, perhaps this can produce a basis to look at a 'checked' context version again in the future. Best wishes, Taco
participants (3)
-
Aditya Mahajan -
Rogutės Sparnuotos -
Taco Hoekwater