[Bug 68610] Enhance problem reporter for more advanced analysis

[Daniel Franke]

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
      
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68610      




------- Additional Comments From daniel.franke imbs uni-luebeck de  2004-04-27 22:21 -------
There is already another wish, more or less a subset of this one: #74066

I actually thought of priorities of  fixme,  bug,  todo ...  whatever, not of errors. An error is an error (a high priority task in itself), unused variables shouldn't be much more than warnings, and again I daresay, a warning is a warning, and I do not see much sense in prioritise warnings ?! 
Errors and Warnings are/will be reported by the parser on its own, fixme's and todo's are defined by the user - and the user may have a priority on each of them. 
In addition: in general, I try to get rid of errors as soon as possible, whereas, when I bother to add " todo ...", I do NOT intend to do it right now,
therefore a ranking is useful only to items that will persist for a while ...
maybe this holds for other users also?!

To add user-defined keywords (and give a facility to rank them), I first thought of adding priorities to keywords, such as:
 * fixasap - hight prior
 * fixme - normal prior
 * fixsometime - low prior
but I didn't like that. 

To avoid to have to track each report-item behind the scenes (add/remove/change items) -which would exceed my capabilities- I came up with the thoughts described at comment #3 - to some extend it even allows to have your priorities in the dox as well, a very nice feature :) - on the other hand, if individual ranks are added, they have to be preserved, otherwise, each time the project is closed one'd loose any customization - but IF these ranked problems are saved - they have to be synced with the files. When doing so, one should have in mind that the user may have used VI to remove a line, add a  todo, remove others and so on ... (there's no need to preserve errors and warnings, of course). 

To summarize:
 * The original wish asks for parser enhancements - I can't do them ;)
 * comment #1 and wish #74066 ask for configureable keywords and priorities for problems - I may add the user-defined keywords, but priorities have to be thought over.