GNU bug report logs - #77480
31.0.50; Flymake: impossible to show multiline diagnostics in echo area

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Nicolás Ojeda Bär <n.oje.bar <at> gmail.com>
Cc: joaotavora <at> gmail.com, 77480 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#77480: 31.0.50; Flymake: impossible to show multiline diagnostics in echo area
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2025 16:48:06 +0300

Ping!  Any progress with this issue?

> Cc: 77480 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Nicolás Ojeda Bär <n.oje.bar <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 08:47:02 +0200
> 
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 10:28 AM João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > First, Flymake has two ways of showing
> > diagnostic in the echo area:
> >
> > 1 flymake-mode insinuates itself onto ElDoc
> >    eldoc-documentation-functions, which you have correctly identified,
> >    so you get at-point echo area updates as you navigate code.
> >
> > 2. interactive, on-demand Flymake commands such as
> >    flymake-goto-next-error
> >
> > In approach number 1, Flymake is usually sharing a hotly contested
> > ElDoc-managed resource with many other outlets (since you use Eglot you
> > know what I'm talking about).  I chose the "one line per backend"
> > default rule from years of dealing with many user reports about this
> > topic, as a means of keeping the maximum amount of users content.
> 
> OK, thanks for the context.
> 
> > In approach number 2, as far as I can see, you do suffer this
> > limitation, and the line is truncated.  But this behaviour has been
> > around since the inception of modern flymake as I rewrote it circa 2017.
> 
> Indeed, I had 2. in mind when I wrote my previous email.
> 
> > Changing approach number 2 to honour the
> > `eldoc-echo-area-use-multiline-p` is very problematic for two reasons
> > (a): it's odd to use a variable not really connected to the mechanism it
> > uses to access that space, since it calls `message`directly. (b) it
> > would break a lot of workflows everywhere.
> 
> OK, that's fair.
> 
> >   There are a good number of issues in the Eglot tracker showing how to
> >   do this and how everyone has a slightly different view on the topic.
> 
> Thanks for the pointer, I will take a look. I also tried Flycheck
> which by default
> does not truncate the diagnostics shown in the echo area.
> 
> > So there is, in my view, no need for changes to ElDoc or Flymake in this
> > regard.
> 
> OK, that's fair.
> 
> > > Looking at the Git history, this behaviour seems to have changed or
> > > introduced recently, in commit 560950468588117b264a9f916fb578e0eb2a124a.
> >
> > By the way, this was 2 years ago, hardly "recently".
> 
> True!
> 
> > João
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
> 
> 
> 
> 

Previous Next

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