RE: parser contributions soapbox (was Re: [cdt-dev] FW: [eclipse- dev] C

[Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>]

Multi-language is my thing mainly because I love writing parsers. Weird,
maybe, but it's something I've always been interested in.

The funny thing is that the original post listed debugging and refactoring
as the two features they want the most for C#. And, yes, these are probably
the most valuable features I use in the JDT today, and I've always found
debugging valuable in any IDE I've used.

But, as John eluded to, these two features are probably the hardest to
implement. These are major features that require a lot of code and testing
to get right, especially the parsers that feed into the DOM necessary for
refactoring. We still don't have true refactoring in the CDT, BTW.

But I'm also not interested in killing the idea. To that end, I have created
a 'dotnet' area in the org.eclipse.cdt project in CVS. I'll be checking in
the parser work I'm doing into there. It should also be pretty easy to set
up an editor and managed build support. But beyond that, this effort will
need help to make it happen.

As Mike Milinkovich said to me yesterday, C# support would be "freakin'
cool" if we could make it happen. And as with all things Eclipse, it'll only
happen with significant contributions from the community. And I'll do what I
can to facilitate that.

Cheers,
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC member
http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ryan Hapgood
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 1:08 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: parser contributions soapbox (was Re: [cdt-dev] FW:
[eclipse-dev] C# plugin for Eclipse)

>
> Ryan Hapgood wrote on 06/13/2006 05:45:57 PM:
> > It may also be a good idea to consider objective C when going  
> through
> > any design steps. This would make things much easier when Bug 68083
> > (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=68083) gets more  
> votes/
> > support.
> >
> > Ryan.
>
> Just wanted to tell it like it is, from beyond the CDT-grave ... I set
> that defect to "Future" almost 2 years ago BTW. :-)
>
> Speaking from my experience, it takes a considerable development  
> effort
> to implement, test & support these type of features for a varied cross
> product of target languages, compilers, os's & architectures.  Unless
> some company steps up to the table to fund development & testing of
> Objective-C extensions, it will not happen, and I cannot see how
> any number of bugzilla votes will make a real difference.
>

It has to be said that I was not implying objective C support should  
be added now, or even in the next two years. I was simply stating  
that perhaps if language extensions/variations are going to be  
addressed and designs put in place, the changes could allow for more  
than just C#. It is not realistic to believe that a truly extensible  
design can be reached straight away but if it is kept in mind it may  
allow more companies to see CDT as a viable platform to build on and  
contribute to.

Ryan.

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