On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:06:24 -0700 Shankhoneer Chakrovarty shankhoneer@gmail.com wrote:
Last and least, pull request #191 and SF patch #11 are earlier than
#226. If one of them is applied, #226 will be seriously broken.
I had no idea about these PRs. Thanks for pointing this out. I will check them.
Hmmm... I wrote to the mailing list about them, answering to "shan chak shankholove@gmail.com", though that's not identical to your account.
So I guess what you are trying to suggest is:
- Generalize the behavior for all the programming languages supported by
geany. I have to find out which languages generate warning messages and which dont, this may take some time.
For the old parser, I think covering the example messages will be enough.
- Remove the hard coding of line_idx+2
Looking at the D/HTML examples, a simple indexing will not work.
- Make changes for both regex parsing as well as older parsing method
Regex should be covered, of course... though that'll lead to even more conflicts between PR #226 and PR #191-or-SF patch #11.
If I make these changes, will then you merge the PR? Or Do I need to do more changes? Please feel free to give me feedback. [...]
Disclaimer: I'm not a leading developer, and can't merge your changes. What I can tell you, however, is that the current partial PR #226 is not very likely to be considered.
As the author of SF patch #11, I plan to extend it for warnings, using code from PR #226, except for the parsing. But I don't have time now.