[m-dev.] another coloring question: should we color "predicate" and "function" before names

[Peter Wang]

On Sun, 19 May 2024 13:45:24 +1000 Julien Fischer <jfischer at opturion.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2024 at 11:10, Zoltan Somogyi <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > The attached .err file has two error messages, on lines 8 and 9,
> > about the same predicate. Both messages refer to "predicate `exp1'/0".
> > Both color "`exp1'/0" as the subject of the error message. One includes
> > the word "predicate" in that coloring, the other does not.
> > Both approaches are justifiable, but in this case, I don't think
> > it is a good idea to have different error messages differ
> > in what they color: we should either color "predicate"
> > (and of course "function" in other cases") together with the symname
> > and arity, or not, in all diagnostics, or at least all diagnostics
> > where the func vs pred distinction is itself the error being
> > reported.
> >
> > I slightly prefer the approach of *not* coloring "predicate"
> > in such cases, simply to reduce the resemblance between
> > our diagnostics and ransom notes. However, I would like to know
> > whether anyone objects to this approach, because adopting
> > the approach requires changing the interface of the utility function
> > describe_one_pred_name,
> 
> 
> No objections from me.

I also prefer less. This goes for "variable ...", "module ...",
"predicate declaration for predicate ...", etc.

Peter