Closed Niluge-KiWi closed 8 years ago
Thanks for your thoughts on this, I think this is a great idea!
I am just not sure whether this should get implemented as
--err-sum-line-length
)--err-show-line-length
to show all errors, one line per fileI got the impression over the last months that some users are not happy with the current behavior, so I might favor the second variant as that would still adhere to sift's "search everywhere" design principle and inform the user about possible problems and solutions.
I would be happy to hear some thought on this.
I implemented the second variant as of version 0.7.0.
Followup to #16 which introduced the
--err-skip-line-length
option to totally disable the "very long lines" error:--err-skip-line-length
is useful to avoid being spammed when many files ave too large lines to be searched.However, it's dangerous to use this option: it completely silence the fact that some files were skipped because of their size.
To fix this, I suggest to print a one line error, at the end of the
sift
execution, when at least one file was skipped because of its size (maybe with a skipped file counter).This would both avoid the spam (one line is not a spam, and if it is, we could have another option to really disable all of this, as it's currently done), and still inform the user that some files have been skipped: if the user wants full results, it could disable the option, or change the blocksize limit, as explained in the current error log.