Re: [cdt-dev] CDT Call Tomorrow

[Jesper Eskilson <jesper.eskilson@xxxxxx>]

Elena Laskavaia wrote:
> Sorry I have to miss this call.
> About 5.1
> - MBS: projects
>  - wizards fixes (I think we won't apply it in 5.0 at this point?)
>  - we need to extend API to achieve better customization

The possibility of defining a toolchain using a Java API instead of in 
XML would be really, REALLY, nice.

I've complained about this before 
(http://thisisnotaprogrammersblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/writing-toolchain-plugin-for-cdt-or.html), 
but it's such a pain to try to write the toolchain definition in XML. 
It's clumsy and awkward at best and if you've made non-trivial mistakes 
in your XML-code, you're basically on your own.

I really don't get the point of using XML for the toolchain definition 
in the first place. Yes, it might be good to be able to define 
extensions without having to write Java code, but only for simple 
extensions (which toolchains are not). After that it's more pain to 
write XML than Java.

Unless you're writing a toolchain for a compiler which is almost 
identical to GCC you will still need to write Java code. (macro 
providers, dependency scanners, etc.)

--
/Jesper