[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
|
MBS is considering whatever extensions are defined in the asmSource
content-type to be source files for the Gnu assembler tool. Because of
the current Eclipse behavior with respect to case sensitivity, only
uppercase S is being recognized automatically. Removing *.S from the
asmSource content-type will mean that only lowercase s will be
recognized automatically. In either case, the other "s/S" can be added
to the project-specific content-type definition and MBS will then
recognize it as a Gnu assembler source file.
I vote for removing *.S. Is it too late? I need to know what is going
to happen in order to update MBS test benchmarks.
Thanks,
Leo
-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 1:11 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
Just to back up Alain's claim, here's the excerpt from
the gnu make manual. I guess this should be the guide
while we are so gnu centric.
---
Assembling and preprocessing assembler programs
`n.o' is made automatically from `n.s' by running
the assembler, as. The precise command is `$(AS)
$(ASFLAGS)'.
`n.s' is made automatically from `n.S' by running
the C preprocessor, cpp. The precise command is
`$(CPP) $(CPPFLAGS)'.
Cheers,
Doug
--- Alain Magloire <alain@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev