[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cdt-dev] Include path discovery hardcoded to use "gcc"
- From: John Dallaway <jld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 16:23:23 +0100
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- User-agent: Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (X11/20060614)
Sennikovsky, Mikhail wrote:
> John Dallaway wrote:
>> Is there a reason why the tool used for scanning was kept distinct from
>> the tool used for compiling within CDT?
> First of all there is a historical reason for this: the scanner info
> provider mechanism is not part of the MBS functionality and knows
> nothing about MBS tools. The other thing is that the scanner info
> provider command can (theoretically) differ from the tool command used
> for compilation, so we should not link them tightly with each other.
Yes, that makes sense for arbitrary (non-GNU) compiler tools.
> IMHO the easiest way to be used for now for solving this issue is to
> allow using the Build Macros (Variables) in the profile definition.
> This should allow the profile settings to be always consistent with the
> tool settings, e.g. we could introduce the "ToolCommand" macro and then
> use this macro in the scanner info provider command. This will guarantee
> that the provider command will by default always be the same as the tool
> command as well as will allow users to modify this behavior by
> customizing the info provider command.
That approach would work for me apart from the fact that I can see no
way for my plug-in to provide default macro names and values via the
org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core.buildDefinitions extension point. Is
that what you mean by allowing build macros in the profile definition?