hi Warren,
>
Can
this file be configuration rather than project specific?
I
remember this being discussed at the fall conference, and would like to try and
summarize what was said
1)
re-indexing per-configuration would be prohibitively expensive. Maintaining
separate files would still require an initial reindex per configuration, or on adding
a new configuration.
I don't think we have a bugzilla for this if you wanted to
revisit it
2)
it was suggested that a configuration is nominated as the "indexing
configuration", and this could be changed by the user as a preference as a
compromise.
3)
Leo suggested that the indexing API could still take ICConfiguration's as
parameters from the client code, even if the indexing backend doesn't act on
them. We've not done this at present, but I think it makes sense.
This
issue is also part of a more general question about what statements we can make
about guarantees on the accuracy of the contents of the index e.g. see
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=154563 (we
can fix this)
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=165696
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=171834
From
an offline/pre-built index slant (74433), I'm interested in allowing offline
indexes to be potentially configuration dependent. This is inaccurate in the
same way as 171834, but is something ISV's might want to enable if its
appropriate for their environment.
thanks,
Andrew
cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
wrote on 31/01/2007 13:30:56:
> It's quite possible though that different
build configs have totally
> different include paths, macros, and even
sources. So the index
> after changing configs has the potential of
being just plain wrong.
> Are there plans around supporting
configuration-specific indexing?
> I haven't followed the indexing discussions
very closely but I
> believe the plan is to persist the DOM to a
file. Can this file be
> configuration rather than project specific?
>
> Thanks,
> Warren
>
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of ext Sennikovsky, Mikhail
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:52 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Custom Builders
Migrating to New
> CDTProjectModel[Bug115935]
> Hi Warren,
>
> > I
understand this to mean that the list of include paths and
> macros is going to be build configuration
specific, but that the
> index is still project-wide? Does this
mean the index has to be
> rebuilt every time you switch between build
configs?
> The
index should not rebuild on every configuration change.
> Currently the configuration change - reindex
logic is implemented to
> behave similar to what we had in the Managed
Build System, i.e. in
> case active configuration is changed no
re-index is performed and
> indexer continues working with the old
include path/macro
> dictionary. Once include/macros settings are
changed for the new
> Active configuration, or for the
configuration whose settings are
> currently used by the indexer, the include/macro
dictionary is
> updated to the one provided by the currently
active configuration.
>
> Mikhail
>
>
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Warren.Paul@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:10 PM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Custom Builders
Migrating to New CDT
> ProjectModel[Bug115935]
>
> Hi
Mikhail,
>
> I
understand this to mean that the list of include paths and macros
> is going to be build configuration specific,
but that the index is
> still project-wide? Does this mean the
index has to be rebuilt
> every time you switch between build configs?
>
> Thanks,
> Warren
>
>
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of ext Sennikovsky, Mikhail
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:30 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Custom Builders
Migrating to New CDT Project
> Model[Bug115935]
> Hi Tim,
>
> > Q:
What impacts are there for indexing and getting configuration
> specific indexes rather than proejct-wide
indexes. Currently our
> custom builder is planning on using the
"C/C++ Includes and Macros"
> page to feed the indexer.
> It is
currently planned that the index/PDOM information would not
> support the configuration concept and would
maintain the index
> calculated based upon some specified
configuration data. The build
> system integration would typically provide
include/macros
> information via the new org.eclipse.cdt.core.
> CConfigurationDataProvider extension point
that is intended to
> replace the current PathEntry-related
extension mechanisms.
>
> Mikhail
>
>
>
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Tim.Kelly@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:47 PM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [cdt-dev] Custom Builders Migrating
to New CDT Project
> Model [Bug115935]
>
> Hi -
I'm looking into the design of a Custom Builder based on CDT
> under the current CDT 3.1.1. After looking at
some of the docs and
> commets on the new project model
(https://bugs.eclipse.
> org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=115935) I'm not
entirely certain the impact
> to Custom builders, though it's mentioned in
the bug comments but
> not in the documentation that I can find.
> Q: How
does the concept of making build configurations CDT centric
> impact a custom (incremental) builder?
> Q: What
impacts are there for indexing and getting configuration
> specific indexes rather than proejct-wide
indexes. Currently our
> custom builder is planning on using the
"C/C++ Includes and Macros"
> page to feed the indexer.
> Thanks,
> Tim
> Nokia Developer Tools
> Austin,
TX _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
Don't miss out on your chance to...Do
more with Symbian. Make sure
you visit Symbian at 3GSM 2007, 12-15
February, Barcelona, Spain.
*******************************************************************
*** Symbian Software Ltd is a company
registered in England
and
Wales with registered number 4190020 and registered office at
2-6
Boundary Row, Southwark, London, SE1
8HP, UK.
This message is
intended only for use by the named
addressee and may contain
privileged and/or confidential
information. If you are not the
named addressee you should not
disseminate, copy or take any action
in reliance on it. If you have received
this message in error
please notify postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxx
and delete the message and any
attachments accompanying it
immediately. Neither Symbian nor any of
its Affiliates accepts liability for
any corruption, interception,
amendment, tampering or viruses
occurring to this message in
transit or for any message sent by its
employees which is not in
compliance with Symbian corporate
policy. *************************
*********************************************
