Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow hiding warnings in Scarb output #1689

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

DelevoXDG
Copy link
Contributor

Add no-warnings verbosity option, available as --no-warnings flag or env var setting

Closes #1660

@DelevoXDG DelevoXDG changed the title Allow hiding warnings Allow hiding warnings in Scarb output Oct 25, 2024
@DelevoXDG DelevoXDG marked this pull request as ready for review October 25, 2024 15:22
/// Avoid printing warnings to standard output.
///
/// String representation: `no-warnings`.
NoWarnings,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This can be

Suggested change
NoWarnings,
Error,

Indicating that it will print errors but not warnings

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That was my initial thought too, but we have some outputs that aren’t warnings or errors, like:

    ws.config()ui().print(Status::new("Packaging", &pkg_id.to_string()));

I figured we probably want to keep these messages and only mute warnings, so NoWarnings seemed more fitting.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, I would still use ERROR as it's more customary

Copy link
Contributor Author

@DelevoXDG DelevoXDG Nov 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you sure it's more customary? It might make sense as environment variable setting, but, unlike --quiet, --verbose and --no-warnings, --error as a flag imo doesn't seem like it is directly related to verbosity, and reading docs will be required to understand what it actually does.

utils/scarb-ui/src/lib.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/scarb-ui/src/lib.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +132 to +133
#[test_case(1, 0, false, Verbosity::Quiet, tracing_core::LevelFilter::OFF)]
#[test_case(0, 0, false, Verbosity::Normal, tracing_core::LevelFilter::ERROR)]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why we do not need to change this tests, if we do:

impl From<VerbositySpec> for Verbosity {
    fn from(spec: VerbositySpec) -> Self {
        match spec.integer_verbosity() {
            v if v < -1 => Verbosity::Quiet,
            -1 => Verbosity::NoWarnings,

Shouldn't quiet=1, verbose=0 be the new one then? 🤔

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure I understand, quiet=1, verbose=0 shouldn't produce any different verbosity level than before? That's not something this PR aims to change 🤔

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But you are changing impl From<VerbositySpec> for Verbosity which is used to parse it, right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am, but only to create conditions for setting NoWarnings verbosity level, without affecting impact of --quiet and --verbose flags on settings their respectful verbosity level.

.map(Verbosity::level_value)
.unwrap_or(int_level)
let int_level = if self.no_warnings {
-1
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why check twice? 🤔
Can we do

if self.no_warnings {
    return -1;
}

at the beginning of this function, and avoid changing anything else?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yep, I initially added the check at the beginning of the function, but later thought setting int_level first is just more in line with existing approach. Removed the extra check 👍🏻

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add option to hide warnings but not errors in Scarb output
2 participants