[PD-dev] [ pure-data-Patches-3494768 ] verbose() leaves blank lines when filtered out in Pd window

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

i move that to the list, as it makes discussion easier.

On 2012-02-27 15:32, SourceForge.net wrote:
>> Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave)
> idea to change to loglevel+4 to loglevel+3.  Either leave verbose()'s
> custom level numbering the same, or make it the same as the Pd window,
> error(), logpost(), etc..  I still really think the +4 on the loglevel
> doesn't make sense.

i totally agree that "+4" doesn't make sense at all.
i wonder though what you mean by "leave verbose()'s
custom level numbering the same". the same as what?

from the start of verbose() (which was long before the "custom"
loglevels of logpost()) the idea was as follows:
verbose() should be used for messages that are more verbose (==less
important) than post().
you can increase verbosity by passing one or more "-verbose" arguments
to the cmdline.
when raising verbosity, you will suddenly see messages that you did not
see with a lower verbosity.

"verbose(0)" is meant to be a default (low) verbosity, that is still
less important than post()
keep in mind that this was all before the loglevel stuff; from that pov
it would make no sense at all to have verbose(1) to be more important
than post() and verbose(3) to be less important than post().
instead, all ordinary (that is: >0) verbose-levels are always considered
less important than the "show always" post.

this should still hold true!


furthermore, verbose(0) was meant to have a "similar" verbosity than
post() (but - again - never a higher priority).

somebody (while i remember you saying that the arbitrary number '4' was
introduced by me after much fighting with you and miller, i still cannot
remember that; what i can remember is that i wanted verbose() to use the
loglevel implementation) introduced a random offset of "4", which makes
verbose(0) to only output things if you switch the loglevel to "all",
rather than "debug", which is precisely the loglevel for which verbose()
was meant.

the only reason i see to keep verbose() at "+4" is to discourage it's
use. (which might be what you want, if you think that loglevel() is more
easily understandable)


leaving our differences aside, what i think could be an interesting
change in semantics here, is to output all verbose() messages at
loglevel:=3 (debug) though still apply the filtering based on verbosity.
e.g. both verbose(0, "foo") and verbose(1, "bar") will show at "debug"
level, but the latter will only show up if the user manually raised the
verbosity with the "-verbose" flag to at least "1".

and yes, it makes sense to differentiate between a gui-loglevel and a
system-verbosity, if you generate loads and loads of messages for
debugging which you normally would like to never see on the wire between
pd & pd-gui.

g
fasdmr
IOhannes


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk9LnfoACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvQp6ACgyXpUe5tlt02EWXEXn+KKljf/
DoQAoPNxLBHmQTFCd5Y7+xBHexfeS7sH
=jTRm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3636 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20120227/8734fa26/attachment-0001.bin>