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.
*************************
*********************************************