Add a command-line option --porcelain for machine-readable output

[Witiko]

This PR makes the following changes:

• Add a command-line option --porcelain for machine-readable output.

Demonstration

$ git clone https://github.com/witiko/expltools
$ git checkout feat/porcelain
$ cd expltools/explcheck/src
$ ./explcheck.lua ../testfiles/e102.tex

Checking 1 file

Checking ../testfiles/e102.tex                                  2 errors

    ../testfiles/e102.tex:11:1:          E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts
    ../testfiles/e102.tex:12:3:          E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts

Total: 2 errors, 0 warnings in 1 file

$ ./explcheck.lua ../testfiles/e102.tex --porcelain

../testfiles/e102.tex:11:1: E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts
../testfiles/e102.tex:12:3: E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts

---

This change was made after a discussion with @FrankMittelbach in #8 (comment) and below. It should enable better integration with text editors in the absence of language sever protocol (LSP) support in this early version of explcheck, as discussed in #8 (comment).

I will test this change with Vim and emacs later today and will post screenshots as an interim documentation of the feature. Please, let me know if this is what you had in mind, @FrankMittelbach.

This PR closes ticket #8, together with pull requests #14 and #16.

[Witiko]

Demonstation

[...]

I will test this change with Vim and emacs later today and will post screenshots as an interim documentation of the feature. Please, let me know if this is what you had in mind, @FrankMittelbach.

Emacs

In emacs, open a file such as testfiles/e102.tex from the example in #15 (comment) and execute the following commands, as previously discussed in #8 (comment):

M-x compile
explcheck --porcelain -- e102.tex

This will cause emacs to execute explcheck and let you navigate among the errors by clicking or using (previous-error) and (next-error) commands:

Lines in a different format such as file-wide warnings and errors are ignored by emacs, as expected. However, all issues are recognized as errors by emacs, whereas we would like it to recognize warnings.

Vim

In vim, open a file such as testfiles/e102.tex from the example in #15 (comment) and execute the following commands, as previously discussed in #8 (comment):

:set errorformat=%f:%l:%c:\ %m
:set makeprg=explcheck\ --porcelain\ --\ %
:make

This will cause vim to execute explcheck and let you navigate among the errors with commands :cprev and :cnext:

Lines in a different format such as file-wide warnings and errors are ignored by vim, as expected.

[Witiko]

However, all issues are recognized as errors by emacs, whereas we would like it to recognize warnings.

Emacs seems to use a collection of different patterns compilation-error-regexp-alist-alist that cover a variety of common compilers and tools (like gcc, g++, make, javac, etc.). Our format is similar to that of g++:

^\\(.*\\):\\([0-9]+\\):\\([0-9]+:\\)? \\(error\\|warning\\|note\\): 

Adding error: or warning: to the machine-readable output of explcheck should do the trick.

[Witiko]

Adding error: or warning: to the machine-readable output of explcheck should do the trick.

I made this change in commit 0a4aa68 from this PR:

Demonstration

$ git clone https://github.com/witiko/expltools
$ git checkout feat/porcelain
$ cd expltools/explcheck/src
$ ./explcheck.lua ../testfiles/e102.tex

Checking 1 file

Checking ../testfiles/e102.tex                                  2 errors

    ../testfiles/e102.tex:11:1:          E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts
    ../testfiles/e102.tex:12:3:          E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts

Total: 2 errors, 0 warnings in 1 file

$ ./explcheck.lua ../testfiles/e102.tex --porcelain

../testfiles/e102.tex:11:1: error: E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts
../testfiles/e102.tex:12:3: error: E102 expl3 control sequences in non-expl3 parts

Emacs

Warnings and errors are now correctly recognized by emacs:

[Witiko]

@FrankMittelbach: I believe that this should conclude this PR.

[FrankMittelbach]

Am 13.12.24 um 22:53 schrieb Vít Starý Novotný:

@FrankMittelback: I believe that this should conclude this PR.

yes Vit, except for misspelling my name :-)

[Witiko]

yes Vit, except for misspelling my name :-)

Sorry about that, should be all good now. 👍

[FrankMittelbach]

yes Vit, except for misspelling my name :-)

Sorry about that, should be all good now. 👍

don't worry... with my track record of typos ... it is just that misspelling might result in not reaching me (it did, but that is because I already contributed to this issue I guess).