[ww-devel] Issuing warning messages in PG

[Davor Cubranic]

Thanks for the clarification Mike. I fixed the call to the old name in ‘custom_problem_grader’ and the POD in PGcore.pm. The pull request is at pg/pull/155.

I’ll let you decide whether to make WARN_MESSAGE and PG->warning_message behave exactly the same.

Davor

On Aug 26, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Gage, Michael <michael.gage at rochester.edu> wrote:

> Hi Davor,
> 
> Perhaps I should change the $PG->warning_message for consistency. 
> I changed the PG macro message to WARN_MESSAGE early on to make it more consistent with “warn”.  when it was warning_message I kept 
> mistyping it.
> 
> the reference in custom_problem_grader is a bug and should be fixed. I’ll submit it to bugzilla
> along with a reference to the misleading comments in PGcore.pm
> 
> In any PG problem you should use WARN_MESSAGE.  In the macro files you may have to 
> use main::WARN_MESSAGE  particularly if you have declared a package name in the file.
> 
> In the .pm files you will not have easy access to WARN_MESSAGE but in most cases (when PGcore is a parent) you
> will have access to the method in PGcore. 
> 
> Both DEBUG_MESSAGE  and WARN_MESSAGE() are constructed by PG and are meant to allow a bit more 
> control over the error message.  It also allows the possibility of handling these messages differently when the problem is 
> rendered in a webservice or in a library than when it is rendered in a problem.
> 
> “warn” is a perl command.  It is still sometimes needed when DEBUG_MESSAGE doesn’t work, e.g. if there is a syntax error than 
> perl simply closes down and the messages in the DEBUG_MESSAGE pipeline are never delivered.
> 
> Take care,
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> On Aug 26, 2014, at 2:27 PM, Davor Cubranic <cubranic at stat.ubc.ca> wrote:
> 
>> The current code and documentation seem to be a bit out of date about issuing warnings. For instance, in ‘lib/PGcore.pm’, there is the following POD:
>> 
>> There are three message channels
>> $PG->debug_message()   or in PG:  DEBUG_MESSAGE() 
>> $PG->warning_message() or in PG:  WARNING_MESSAGE()
>> They behave the same way, it is simply convention as to how they are used.
>> 
>> But there is no macro WARNING_MESSAGE anywhere. There is, however, WARN_MESSAGE in ‘macros/PG.pl’. This one is not quite the same as just calling ‘$PG->warning_message()’, because it decorates the message with caller info and frames it with a line border.
>> 
>> ‘lib/PGcore.pm’ also used to contain function “WARN”, but it was commented out in commit 92127e6 (in 2010). It is still used by the “custom_problem_grader_fluid” macro in ‘macro/PGgraders.pl’.
>> 
>> Question: what is the right thing to do? I’m seeing PG macros using mostly “WARN_MESSAGE”, with a few “warn” thrown in. Nobody calls $PG->warning_message directly.
>> 
>> Davor
>> _______________________________________________
>> webwork-devel mailing list
>> webwork-devel at webwork.maa.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://webwork.maa.org/mailman/listinfo/webwork-devel&k=p4Ly7qpEBiYPBVenR9G2iQ%3D%3D%0A&r=enN3K%2BCUdz1bRKB01s3PUtIX0B0zjgWTYpo9pUAD9Ek%3D%0A&m=7xgj59c0UBM%2Bn%2FrwDGvWKZ1lz91orFG8G5RBKvtwerY%3D%0A&s=3a217f3a0041f9f60ff1b516878fd92a1b504eac049c756d511223567ed1ccac
> 
> _______________________________________________
> webwork-devel mailing list
> webwork-devel at webwork.maa.org
> http://webwork.maa.org/mailman/listinfo/webwork-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webwork.maa.org/pipermail/webwork-devel/attachments/20140826/c2532dea/attachment.html>