Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add "### Fast Compile >> .....ts" behind verbose flag, or add silent flag? #191

Open
ThaNarie opened this issue Dec 9, 2014 · 6 comments

Comments

@ThaNarie
Copy link

ThaNarie commented Dec 9, 2014

Hi,

One of the usages of grunt-ts is to compile 'generated' typescript files by a task that rune before this so all code is valid js.

For example:

scaffold:
  - 'scaffold-pages'
  - 'ts'
  - 'sass'
  - 'autoprefixer'
...
### Fast Compile >>deploy/htdocs/inc/script/test/jasmine-matchers.d.ts 
### Fast Compile >>deploy/htdocs/inc/script/test/jasmine.d.ts          
### Fast Compile >>deploy/htdocs/inc/script/test/testSpec.ts           
...

But because the output of grunt-ts is so 'long', as a user you are missing the output of the 'main' task (scaffold-pages).

It would be awesome if we can configure the verbosity of the task, either by putting this output behind the verbose option, or maybe adding a silent option to keep this the default but providing an option to keep it quiet :)

I'm open for providing a PR if desired, but just wanted to know if you're up to this idea and which of the above would be the best approach.

@basarat
Copy link
Member

basarat commented Dec 10, 2014

It would be awesome if we can configure the verbosity of the task,

Do-able without an option > If the count of the filtered files for fast compile equate the original file count > means we are not actively fast compiling and don't output these file names. PR much appreciated.

@ThaNarie
Copy link
Author

Looking at the docs again, I guess I should just set fast to "never" as it will never fast compile when doing a 'stand-alone' grunt-ts from the command-line, and just re-generates the cache every time.

But a change in output when people like me are leaving the option to the default value could still be a good addition, so I might look into that :)

@basarat
Copy link
Member

basarat commented Dec 10, 2014

But a change in output when people like me are leaving the option to the default value could still be a good addition, so I might look into that

👍 leaving this issue open for a hero

@0815fox
Copy link

0815fox commented Apr 15, 2016

+1 I would also like to have that, however, until end of this year I might be too busy to look into that.

@JoshuaKGoldberg
Copy link

JoshuaKGoldberg commented May 8, 2016

Dear god do want. +1.

I just converted a problem from old-style /// <reference path="..." />s to imports and the wall of blue is very disorienting.

@nycdotnet
Copy link
Contributor

I do intend to fix this - in the meantime it should be fairly straight forward to comment out the line that outputs it - it should be around line 39 in compile.js, depending on which version you have.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants