the other question that is tightly related to the "unifying loglevels" thread is, how to deal with "-verbose" resp "-noverbose".

currently the two concepts ("use of '-verbose'" vs "use of logpost()/verbose()") are obviously in the same realm but somewhat independent.

raising verbosity with "-verbose" will: - (obviously) make Pd more chatty, regardless of loglevels. e.g. some errors will only printed (as errors!) is "-verbose" is given - verbose() is coupled with "-verbose", as it will only ever print anything if the verbose level is not bigger than the number of "-verbose" flags present. e.g. "verbose(0)" (aka 'PD_DEBUG') will print if no "-verbose" is given but "verbose(1)" (aka 'PD_VERBOSE') will only print if the "-verbose" flag is present and "verbose(2)" will only print if Pd is invoked with double-verbosity "-verbose -verbose"

i actually think this is not a bad idea (barring the actual values, sede the other thread), as "-verbose" might generate a sufficient amount of traffic between Pd and Pd-GUI to choke the system. even if the output isn't displayed (as the user just uses loglevel "2 normal").

i wonder, whether we should use the "-verbose" flag, to also suppress logpost() messages.

there's two reasons: - deprecate 'verbose()' in favour of 'logpost()' - so we only have to deal with a single beast - better control about what is displayed in "-stderr" mode. when running Pd with "-nogui" (or "-stderr"), the terminal is currently flooded with high-verbose messages (compared to the Pd-console). obviously this is a hyperbole and depends on the actual patch. i do find it annoying though

with the latter in mind, we might even use multiple "-noverbose" flags to lower the verbosity (at least of the stderr) below post() - so that only errors would be visible.

mgsdr IOhannes

PS: i don't know whether there's a question in this mail. but the entire verbose-handling is a bit annoying and i would like to make it easier to grasp.