bug#61413: [PATCH] Make warnings show a "warning" emoji instead of a stop-sign

[Kévin Le Gouguec]

Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru> writes:

>> > > Like this:
>> > > 
>> > >   M-: (display-warning 'warning "foo") RTE
>> > 
>> > Thanks! So, I'm looking at the buffer, and I don't see much difference
>> > compared to how it was before,
>> 
>> Right, the only changes that were committed at this stage impact the
>> help-echo string, so the only visible difference happens if you hover
>> over the no-entry sign, or invoke 'C-h .' with point on the sign.
>> 
>> >                                so my vote in preference of either
>> > applying the patch (that one that started the discussion) or making
>> > the icon a button with text instead still stands.
>> 
>> ACK; FWIW I sent a patch combining both suggestions (using a warning
>> sign - with either an SVG image or an emoji; using a text button for
>> suppression) on this message:
>> 
>> <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=61413#108>
>> 
>> Screenshot:
>> 
>> <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?att=2;bug=61413;filename=Screenshot_20250223_163540.png;msg=108>
>
> Looks nice! FTR, I'm looking at screenshot, and I think maybe it's
> worth clarifying what I mean while saying making the icon a button. I
> meant the visual appearance of a button, like the ones you can see in
> customization menu for variables. Let me put it another way: if you
> take your screenshot to a user who knows nothing about this buffer and
> ask them "find all buttons on the screenshot" — do you think they'd
> point at the warning sign and say "…and these are obviously buttons
> too"? I bet they would not.

I should have clarified: this patch does *three* things:

1. it adds the "(suppress)" text button,
2. it swaps the no-entry sign with a warning sign,
3. (!) it un-buttonizes the warning sign.

IOW with that patch, the warning signs _are_ purely decorative; the text
buttons really _are_ the only actionable buttons in that screenshot.

ISTM if we go for both 1 & 2 (which both had support among participants,
AFAIR), then 3 is a logical next step: why overload the warning sign
with a suppression function, when there is a perfectly explicit text
button for that?