Re: [cdt-dev] Addition of Mach-O 64 Binary Parser to 6.0.2

[Michael Jackson <mike.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 I am all for stable codes and APIs and such but CDT is rapidly  
becoming useless on OS X. Between the lack of a 64 bit parser (which  
means no 64 Bit debugging) and the severe issues with the debugger and  
threads I would like to see these items fixed sooner rather than  
later, but I am probably the vocal minority here so I'll just say it  
once and leave it to whomever makes the decisions.

  CDT is a great IDE to use. The Indexer, Syntax Highlighting, macro  
expansion and code navigation features have not been matched with any  
of the other major IDEs that I use (MS VS 2008 with V Assist X and  
Xcode). Since Apple has moved to x86_64 as the default arch for GCC to  
create this has added even more problems for OS X C/C++ developers to  
use CDT. Add to that the other debugging issues as laid out above and  
you get a really bad experience on OS X. I'll now step off the soap  
box..

--
Mike Jackson <www.bluequartz.net>

On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:41 PM, Christian W. Damus wrote:

> The problem with adding new API on the maintenance stream is that  
> any client bundle that wants to use this new API needs a new minor  
> version (x.y) of the bundle that supplies the API, in order to  
> sensibly express a new lower bound in its dependency range.   
> However, the supplier bundle can't actually raise its version to the  
> next minor number because then (a) it will conflict with the minor  
> version increment of the next release and (b) it will no longer look  
> like a service release, so user installs performing service updates  
> won't get anything.
>
> If this really is new public API, then adding it in the maintenance  
> stream is certain to break some client workflows.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christian
>
>
> On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 11:27 -0600, John Cortell wrote:
> > I don't believe new API is a problem, even for a maintenance  
> > release. I think stability is the key. Any significant amount of  
> > code, API-related or not, that can destabilize existing features is  
> > what we should avoid. I think a new binary parser is a safe  
> > addition, as long as it hasn't mucked around much with the  
> > underlying support code.
> >
> > John
> >
> > At 11:18 AM 11/3/2009, Andrew Gvozdev wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > There is a contribution of Mach-O binary parser for Mac 64 bit. In  
> > > CDT 6.1 it is being added as a new parser. I believe it would be  
> > > valuable addition to 6.0.X stream as well. Technically it  
> > > introduces new API and API changes for maintenance stream are not  
> > > allowed but in this case I would advocate to add it there.
> > >
> > > Does anybody have an objection?
> > >
> > > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=270790
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdt-dev mailing list
> > > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
>
> Christian W. Damus
> Software Developer, IDE Team
> QNX Software Systems