AW: [cdt-dev] managed build: VCErrorParser patch

["Ploett, Norbert" <norbert.ploett@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew,

 

this has been a stumbling block in some of my projects too. Be sure to post the bugzilla number when you're done, or enter me on the CC list straight away.

 

 

Norbert

---

Von: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Doug Schaefer
Gesendet: Freitag, 9. September 2005 14:27
An: nicolas.antoniazzi@xxxxxxxxx; CDT General developers list.
Betreff: RE: [cdt-dev] managed build: VCErrorParser patch

Actually, with Java 1.4’s regular _expression_ parser, it should be possible to make a generic error parser that can be defined with an extension point. This would make a great enhancement request. Could you please file one in bugzilla.

 

Thanks,

Doug Schaefer

Senior Software Developer

QNX Software Systems

---

From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nicolas ANTONIAZZI
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 8:21 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] managed build: VCErrorParser patch

 

Hi,

I'm using this thread to suggest something about localized version of Make. They have quite the same problem as the Visual Parser.
On localized version of GCC, warnings do not have the name "warning", but a translated version. Is there something that has been discussed about thins kind of localisations ?
Would it be possible to create a more Generic Error parser that could resolve errors/warnings from any kind of language (if translation are described in an XML file for example) ?

Thanks,
Nicolas.

2005/9/9, Andrew Ferguson <Andrew.Ferguson@xxxxxxx>:

hi,

 

 I feel a little bad about sending this one but thought I'd see what you think.. :)

 

An old (released) version of our compiler is producing output intended to conform to the Visual Studio output spec. but failing because its outputting "Warning" rather than "warning". I've worked around this by adding a new error parser which relaxes this condition, but is potentially confusing for the user as an additional error parser appears in the build settings. I'm thinking it would be preferable to just have the VCErrorParser tweaked as below.

 

I realize adapting VCErrorParser for every non-conformant tool output would not be a good road to go down, but was wondering if this case is so thin that it might not count as the thin end of the wedge?

 

thanks,

Andrew

 

Index: VCErrorParser.java
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/tools/org.eclipse.cdt-core/org.eclipse.cdt.core/src/org/eclipse/cdt/internal/errorparsers/VCErrorParser.java,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -r1.9 VCErrorParser.java
--- VCErrorParser.java 22 Jul 2005 02:36:06 -0000 1.9
+++ VCErrorParser.java 9 Sep 2005 10:53:13 -0000
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
       }
       IFile file = eoParser.findFileName(fileName);
       if (file != null || eoParser.isConflictingName(fileName)) {
-       String desc = line.substring(firstColon + 1).trim();
+       String desc = line.substring(firstColon + 1).trim().toLowerCase();
        if (file == null) {
         desc = "*" + desc; //$NON-NLS-1$
        }

 

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