[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

I’m a firm believer that IDEs should be able to figure out as much as possible on their own without user intervention. This automation is what allows us to charge the big bucks. J.

 

Another way to think about this issue is that the choice of language is a build setting. It really depends on what tools you are using whether a project is allowed to contain C++ or C or C# or … So by setting your linker and/or compilers, likely by selecting a particular configuration, you can determine what languages are being used.

 

Also, I’d like to get rid of language specific perspectives. With the common navigator ready to go, I see no need for this. In fact, I’d like to talk to the JDT guys about possibly a common perspective as well. Maybe our “Coding” perspective will see the light of day. It makes sense given that the “Debug” perspective is shared as well.

 

Just some random thoughts,

Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems

Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC member

http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sennikovsky, Mikhail
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 9:48 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

 

Here are some thoughts regarding the mixed language problem:

 

MBS linker problem: we should have the newly created project consistent and buildable out of the box. So the approach of manual linker change in order to make a pure C project after project creation maight not work. I also agree that dynamic linker detection based upon the project contents may be painful, so we might still have a C, C++, FORTRAN, etc. nature associated with the project to define the primary language to be used and to select a linker based upon the primary language. The primary language could be as well used in UI, e.g. to define the default perspective, etc.

 

The .h language problem: as I understand there are two different ways of how includes can be processed:

1.       Include file is processed as the “#include” statement is encountered in the source file (the PDOM calculation case?). In this case we should use the language of the current source file that includes the given include being processed, and thus we do not have the problem of .h language detection in this case.

2.       Include file is processed independently (the CModel calculation). In this case we do have the problem of detecting the .h file language, but since the CModel source information (ITranslationUnit children) contains only the main outline info, I think it might be calculated in the same way both for both C and C++ .h files. Also in case we make the CModel use the PDOM this problem might disappear as well.

Although since we might still need the primary language info, we could use it for the .h language calculation as well, I just think that having one and the same. h file be processed depending on the language of the source file that includes it may provide a better flexibility and consistency of the created PDOM info.

 

Content type case insensitivity issue: It might make sense to talk to platform guys one more time regarding this. There is a bug regarding this already: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=105022, probably it could be fixed for the next major platform release.

 

Mikhail

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daoust, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 5:00 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

 

I would like to see the project type be "cdt" and that the two cases below be resolved as:

 

1.  Have a preference for how to open .h files (by default this should be C++)

2.  Have a Linker page on the managed build that can describe the linker (g++, gcc, ld, whatever)

     It would also be good to have a languages tab that is used to enable the visiblity of the settings for C++/C/Fortran/8 Ball/whatever else is contributed

 

Then we could use the new project wizards to set the default for each project  (eg. New C++...  would set .h files to C++, linker to g++, and enable C and C++)

 

If anybody wanted to mix-n-match more than this, they could do it from the properties directly.

 

    - Dave

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 8:53 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

Yes, the two main uses that I haven’t seen a good workaround is with header files as Markus mentions below, and with managed make which needs to link in the C++ runtime, or use a C++ specific linker if there are C++ files in the project.

 

One option would be to scan the resources in a project and look for C++ content types to do this behaviour, but my guess is that would be as painful as the Binary Parser is now J.

 

Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems

Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC member

http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Schorn, Markus
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 8:36 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

 

In CDT various techniques are used to figure out whether to treat (parse, highlight, ..) a file as c- or

c++ file. Some of them seem to be workarounds for the problem that content-types use case insensitive

file patterns. (*.c vs *.C).

 

I think we should rely on the content type as much as possible. I just want to compute it smarter by preferring case-sensitive matches over insensitive ones.

 

However, whatever we do, a conflict will remain for the *.h files as the extension is used for both c and

c++-code. We can use the C++project nature to determine the language of *.h-files. In a mixed setup

I would parse headers as C++, it's usually the better choice. So mixed projects should use the C++

nature.

 

The C++-project nature then will be a synonym for

      "Assume that *.h-files contain c++ code."

and can probaly be better replaced by a project preference.

 

Markus.

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sennikovsky, Mikhail
Sent: Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 13:29
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

#1 makes more sense to me from the current perspective. And this is actually how MBS gnu tool-chain is currently defined: Managed Make Gnu C++ projects by default allow having both C and C++ sources currently, while Gnu C projects allow C only.

Note that generally it is possible that the C or C++ projects contain some other language, e.g. FORTRAN. In this sense the project nature should be used for identifying the primary language only, while the language should be determined based upon the file name (i.e. file extension) given the content type and/or some other info. We’re going to stick to this approach in the future to allow multi- and mixed- language support in CDT.

Talking of C and C++ I think it is reasonable to have one type of project for supporting both C and C++ in the future.

Are there any specific requirements for the content type bugs you’re working on that require the pre-defined list of supported languages?

 

Mikhail


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Schorn, Markus
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 1:57 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: [cdt-dev] c/cpp projects and content-types

 

Hi,

I am fixing bugs related to the content types. I am confused about the meaning of c- vs. c++ projects.

Which one is correct?

 

Interpretation 1:

c-project allows for plain c, only.

c++-project must be used for c++-code or mixed setups.

 

Interpretation 2:

c++-project allows for c++, only.

c-project must be used for c-code or mixed setups.

 

Markus.

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Leherbauer, Anton
Sent: Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 09:37
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Please accept my contributions to C/C++ editor

Sergey,

 

thanks for the patches.

I'll have a look.

 

Toni

 


From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sergey Prigogin
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 8:39 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: [cdt-dev] Please accept my contributions to C/C++ editor

Bugzillas 148582 and 140489 contain patches implementing "smart indenting" and "smart caret positioning" in C/C++ Editor. Could please somebody take a look at these patches and apply them to the HEAD. Thanks a loot.

-Sergey