[texworks] Latex Errors script.
st.loeffler at gmail.com
Wed Jan 13 07:32:00 CET 2010
On 2010-01-11 22:47, Casey P. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon Dec 21, James Crippen suggested renaming the "Latex Errors"
> script to "Latex warnings." I would actually like to see it go a step
> further. Errors and (perhaps) SEVERE warnings could be handled by
> latexErrors.js and a separate file (latexWarnings.js) would handle
> everything else.
Having several tabs (for errors, warnings, and possibly also a separate
one for box warnings) is certainly a viable option. I wonder, however,
if it wouldn't be easier to use to have all of them in one list (rather
than having to go through all 2-3 tabs to check them all). In this case,
it would be preferably if those messages were ordered by severity
(errors first, than warnings, than box warnings). This would require the
AfterTypeset hook (which is implemented by the error scripts) to take
some form of severity flag. With it, we could even color code the items
or display a small icon next to them (as most other TeX editors do).
This way you could immediately see any errors and ignore warnings if you
don't want to handle them, but you'd have all in one list when you need
to check them all.
> I have separated these on my own machine, and I vastly prefer it
> because my error list doesn't get gunked up with warnings that I don't
> care about.
> It would certainly be easier on me if this separation were standard.
> What do others think?
Added my 2 cent ;).
> Perhaps at some point the UI (manage scripts) could have the ability
> to selectively turn on/off the "Latex warnings" tab entirely?
Disabling scripts is certainly a feature that would fit nicely into the
manage scripts dialog. Still, I'd rather keep this an expert option. The
standard use case IMO should be that all installed scripts are enabled
(why else would someone want to install them other than to use it). And
having to disable/enable scripts repeatedly is something I'd like to
avoid in normal use.
> Incidentally, "latexErrors.js" as implemented does not detect
> Windows-style paths (at least, not on my machines). In case anybody
> else using Windows would like this functionality, I have uploaded a
> version in Issue 270 that does this. As I don't currently run TeXWorks
> on any non-Windows systems, I can't guarantee that it works there, but
> I think I have the code right.
I'll have to look into this, but thanks for the patch.
More information about the texworks