[GEM-dev] using logpost(3) for version message

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Sep 29, 2011, at 11:23 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2011-09-29 17:05, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>
>>> so you are saying that there is a loglevel between post() and
>>> verbose(0)? how come?
>>
>>
>> Because that's the way it is, and that the way that you insisted it  
>> be
>> against Miller and my objections.  You insisted that verbose() post  
>> with
>> a +4 on the log level.
>
> since i cannot remember such a thing (even after reading up the
> discussion on verbose() again), i would very much like you to give a
> reference for my "insistance" and your (and miller's ) objections.
>
> what i do remember, is that i i wanted verbose(3) to be more important
> than verbose(5), and that verbose(0) is less important than post().
>
> the latter is probably the reason for "+4" [1], but my intention would
> never have been to have a _gap_ between post() and verbose(0).
>
> post() should be verbose(-1), and not verbose(-2).
>
> the problem probably came from removing some named error loglevel, and
> due to the confusion between named loglevels and numbered loglevels.



I think the numbering in verbose() is weird. What you propose makes a  
little more sense than the current thing, but I think there should  
just be one numbering scheme at the interface, i.e. logpost(3) should  
post at the same level as verbose(3) and they both should be the same  
numbers as what are in the Pd window.  I completely avoid verbose()  
because it means I have to look up or test how its numbers work.  With  
ogpost(), I just think about log level menu, which I use a lot.

.hc

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mistrust authority - promote decentralization.  - the hacker ethic