From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 23:56:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CodingGuidelines: document which output goes to stdout vs. stderr
Message-ID: <CAPig+cTAzmaHJa3tGniO5AsL+tQO9+bZuO-AUqU+WisDEgp4UQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1f0cc771-b661-42ae-e928-75c27f1dab07@iee.email>

On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 6:27 PM Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email> wrote:
> On 01/12/2021 05:32, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > +Program Output
> > +
> > + We make a distinction between a command's primary output and output
> > + which is merely chatty feedback (for instance, status messages,
> > + running transcript, or progress display), as well as error messages.
> > + Roughly speaking, a command's primary output is that which one might
> > + want to capture to a file or send down a pipe; its chatty output
> > + should not interfere with those use-cases.
>
> Is there a case for commenting on whether chatty output may be
> suppressed if not feeding a terminal, or is that mentioned elsewhere? I
> often see comments about the isatty() detection.

I don't think I saw any such mention when reading through
CodingGuidelines before composing the new text. That's certainly a
topic which could be addressed, but I don't plan on adding it to this
patch since I don't have any specific idea in mind for how it would be
discussed. However, the new "Program Output" section added by this
patch seems a good place to add that discussion if someone wants to
have a go at it as a separate patch atop this one.