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

[Alain Magloire <alain@xxxxxxx>]

> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] ASM content-type and uppercase S
> 
> I think it fits in the small enough change for big gain category. I am
> still waiting for people to vote for RC3. If you want to make this
> change and get it in we can another quick respin. But we really should
> get RC3 out by the end of today.
> 
> Other thoughts?

Thanks for your patience, Doug

"S" remove in the head.
Fix PR 106340: ArrayIndexOutOfBound, the length of the array was not checked
before accessing the elements.

Small changes big gain 8-)

So we are formally asking for a respin.

On our side we are looking at the docs and any PRs are diverted to
3.0.1/3.1, unless major shock && awe or atomic bombs.

> Doug
> 
> Treggiari, Leo wrote:
> 
> >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
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdt-dev mailing list
> >cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Doug Schaefer, Senior Software Developer
> IBM Rational Software, Ottawa Lab
> Kanata, Ontario, Canada
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev