RE: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S

[Alain Magloire <alain@xxxxxxx>]

The meaning of *.S files were assembly code containing preprocessor symbols.
So the preprocessor must be run on the file first and the output can be fed
to the assembler.

I'm not sure of the actions of the MBS but if it consider *.s and *.S to be
the same, then lets remove the *.S

Really I would preferred to define a new ContentType in CDT/Core

   <extension point="org.eclipse.core.runtime.contentTypes"> 
      <file-association 
       content-type="org.eclipse.cdt.core.asmPreProcessorSource"
       file-extensions="S"/>
   </extension>

But I do not think, that is probably to late to introduce a new content-type
(maybe for CDT-3.1).  And with the problem of the ContentType framework
blindly doing uppercase(or lowercase) to all not sure of the side
effects(There is a PR on this).

For the CDT modules the use of asm is in :
- AsmEditor --> contentType(asmSource)
- CView --> choosing the right icon(asmSource).

So removing the *.S in the file-extensions is not a big problem.

Any other comments?

Votes?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Sennikovsky, Mikhail
> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 11:44 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> I was looking through the managed build test failures now and I'm not sure
> whether the test benchmark files or CDT is to be updated :-0
> 
> 
> 
> The difference in the benchmark files that confuses me is related with the
> asm sources content type. The benchmark assumes asm sources have a lower
> case .s extension, while MBS generates makefiles that include uppercase .S
> files and do not include lowercase .s.
> 
> 
> 
> Leo recently posted the below email that met no objections and comments.
> 
> So what is the consensus on asm sontent types? Should we remove the
> uppercase S from the asm content type extension list or should we keep it?
> In case we keep it, files with the lowercase .s extension will not be
> treated as asm sources.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Mikhail
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Treggiari, Leo
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:59 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
> 
> 
> 
> I'm assuming lowercase "s" files are more common.  If not, please reply.
> Given the current state of the content type support, we have 2 choices
> with regards to s vs. S.
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  Remove S from the content type.  If a user has S files, he will need
> to add *.S to the project specific content type.  The way it is now, he
> would have to add *.s.
> 
> 2.  Don't use content types in the assembler tool definition.  This would
> go back to the 2.1 behavior where there is a fixed set of extensions
> associated with the assembler.
> 
> 
> 
> What do people think is best?
> 
> 
> 
> Leo
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Lott, Jeremiah
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 10:44 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't try the latest build, but I got the latest from head and ran
> self-hosted.  You are correct.  Capital "S" files are included.  Lowercase
> "s" files are not.
> 
> 
> 
>   Jeremiah
> 
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Treggiari, Leo
> 	Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 10:41 AM
> 	To: CDT General developers list.
> 	Subject: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
> 
> 	Does anyone have a managed make project that includes assembler
> source to try with the latest build?  I have a suspicion that with the
> latest ASM content type description that includes both lowercase s and
> uppercase s, and the current Eclipse treatment of content type case
> insensitivity, lowercase s files would be not included, by default, in the
> build.  I'd try it myself if I had a test case.
> 
> 
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 
> 	Leo