RE: [cdt-dev] Toolchains in CDT

["Lott, Jeremiah" <jeremiah.lott@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

OK.  The binary parser is the area I know the least about at this point.
As a toolchain provider our goal was to have a user be able to choose a
"toolchain" from a drop-down containing a set of known toolchains,
rather than specifying the path for each tool individually.  That way we
can extend an extension point and advertise that our tools are available
on the machine.  We could probably implement that completely in the UI.
(No changes to IBinaryParser or any of its implementations.)  Do you
think that would be acceptable?  Or will your changes to the spec handle
this case?

  Jeremiah

-----Original Message-----
From: Alain Magloire [mailto:alain@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 5:36 PM
To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Toolchains in CDT


> 
> > Ok, here is an example, the binaryParser.
> 
> > The way it is done now, IBinaryParser is an extension point, It is 
> > set
> on the=20
> > project via the PropertyPage, some parsers say the GNUElf parser 
> > needs
> tools, and > they provide a UI to set the paths, for things like 
> addr2line, c++filt etc ..
> 
> > What will be the workflow now ?
> 

Bonjour

  The folks here bounce your ideas on the toolchain on different
scenarios. It seems a more appropriate thing for the Managed Builder,
specially when dealing with paths.

In the case of the CDT/Core, folks here seem to thing that they can make
things work with the IBinaryParser.  We will update the specs on this to
better illustrate.



_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev