Am 24.10.2021 22:08 schrieb Sven Schreiber:
Am 24.10.2021 um 19:47 schrieb Allin Cottrell:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2021, Sven Schreiber wrote:
>> ... despite the doc saying that the quiet option should lead to no
>> printout.
>
> True, the doc is not accurate on that point. Nonetheless, printing a
> bare confirmation of the location from which the file was loaded is by
> design -- other than that, the rest of the usual printed output from
> "append" is supressed. I suppose there could be a --silent option that
> truly prints nothing.
Yes, I think that would be good. IMO, when using such commands in
internal functions, there should be a way to really have the internal
function do its work silently, without the included commands
interfering
in the output that's visible to the end user. (Unless something goes
wrong.)
>> Secondly, it would also be useful if 'store' had such an option in
>> the
>> first place. The use case is the same as for append, namely that in
>> some
>> scripts/packages the printout shouldn't be cluttered with more or
>> less
>> meaningless path echo information.
>
> That information is not meaningless if the command didn't specify an
> absolute path. But maybe we could arrange to suppress it if an
> absolute
> path was given.
Sorry, I didn't mean "meaningless" in general, but in the context of
certain (= "some") scripts or packages. Again, the point is that a
function author should have control over whether something like that is
printed out. I'm not sure the absolute path condition would ensure
that.
Wouldn't a quiet (or silent) option also be easier to add?
Identifying whether an absolute or relative path was passed sounds like
over-engineering to me ;-) Sven's proposal to add a --silent flag sounds
handy to me, too.
Best,
Artur