GNU bug report logs - #29669
repl-print - requet for iprovement

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 29669 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
To: <bug-guile <at> gnu.org>
Subject: repl-print - requet for iprovement
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:36:15 -0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello,

Attached a patch so repl-print becomes 'friendly' wrt large (huge) lists,
arrays, srfi-4 bytevectors ...

	I looked at the documentation but I could not spot anything/places where
	things would need to be changed wrt the above patch?

	Dito wrt tests?

Thanks,
David

[0001-Updating-repl-print-to-use-truncated-print.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[Message part 3 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #8 received at 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> igalia.com>, Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>,
 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#29669: repl-print - requet for iprovement
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:26:37 +0200

Hello,

David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be> skribis:

> From d920d22efe3e77d23004122e21cec420c402f531 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:28:24 -0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Updating repl-print to use truncated-print
>
> * module/system/repl/common.scm (repl-print): Use (truncated-print val),
>   not (write val).  With this update, repl-print becomes 'friendly' wrt
>   large (huge) lists, arrays, srfi-4 butevoectors ...

Note that it’s already possible to do this:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
scheme@(guile-user)> ,use (ice-9 pretty-print)
scheme@(guile-user)> ,o print (lambda (repl obj) (truncated-print obj) (newline))
scheme@(guile-user)> (iota 500)
$20 = (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 # …)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

So the question becomes: should we change the default?

I have a slight preference for keeping the default as it is to avoid
surprises, but no strong opinion.

Andy, Mark, others, WDYT?

Ludo’.

Message #11 received at 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> igalia.com>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>, 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
Subject: Re: bug#29669: repl-print - requet for iprovement
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2018 09:49:04 +0200

On Sun 01 Jul 2018 18:26, ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Hello,
>
> David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be> skribis:
>
>> From d920d22efe3e77d23004122e21cec420c402f531 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
>> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:28:24 -0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] Updating repl-print to use truncated-print
>>
>> * module/system/repl/common.scm (repl-print): Use (truncated-print val),
>>   not (write val).  With this update, repl-print becomes 'friendly' wrt
>>   large (huge) lists, arrays, srfi-4 butevoectors ...
>
> Note that it’s already possible to do this:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,use (ice-9 pretty-print)
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,o print (lambda (repl obj) (truncated-print obj) (newline))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (iota 500)
> $20 = (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 # …)
>
> So the question becomes: should we change the default?
>
> I have a slight preference for keeping the default as it is to avoid
> surprises, but no strong opinion.
>
> Andy, Mark, others, WDYT?

Hoo, I don't know.  If we were to do this it should be controllable by
REPL options, I think; we'd need the ability to go back and forth.  But
if we have the option I think it could make sense for it to be on by
default, like what GDB does.  Thing is, truncated-print does its job
only OK, not great, so it's a hard sell to standardize on it.  You
probably do want multi-line prints sometimes...

Andy

Message #14 received at 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> igalia.com>
Cc: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#29669: repl-print - requet for iprovement
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 23:37:03 -0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Ludo,
Andy,

> > scheme@(guile-user)> ,use (ice-9 pretty-print)
> > scheme@(guile-user)> ,o print (lambda (repl obj) (truncated-print obj) (newline))
> > scheme@(guile-user)> (iota 500)
> > $20 = (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
> > # …)
> >
> > So the question becomes: should we change the default?

Why not? then who would want multi-line prints would do the 'oppoite' of the above,
right?

	scheme@(guile-user)> ,use (ice-9 pretty-print)
	scheme@(guile-user)> ,o print (lambda (repl obj) (write obj) (newline))

Or, as I do in Guile-CV, implement a specific display method for 'their
objects' (im-display in guile-cv, and the manual says 'to be used with caution...)

> > I have a slight preference for keeping the default as it is to avoid
> > surprises, but no strong opinion.

What surprise(s)? :),
I mean, what sort of code or who's the one of us who would rely on the repl print
'layout' in any sort of way(s)?

> > Andy, Mark, others, WDYT?  

> Hoo, I don't know.  If we were to do this it should be controllable by
> REPL options, I think; we'd need the ability to go back and forth.  But
> if we have the option I think it could make sense for it to be on by
> default, like what GDB does. 

It seems to me it is a yes :)

	note that (just not to forgot), we need this to be done both for the repl
	_and_ exception printers as well ... it is as essential if not more then
	within the repl

> Thing is, truncated-print does its job  only OK, not great, so it's a hard sell to
> standardize on it.  You probably do want multi-line prints sometimes...

I'm actually using truncated-print all the time, since it is simply impossible
otherwise to use/develop guile-v, and I never spotted any 'problem' (not to say I
can guarantee there is none of course, but that did not happen in years).  Then we
could always improve when someone report a problem ...

Thanks,
David

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.