[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF Disassembly"
|
At 10:05 AM 2/19/2010, Warren.Paul@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_5ABC9C306CCC574887C58E7EAC03A28C28C15851C7NOKEUMSG02mgd_"
Given the view is still in DSF, why would we move the prefs out of the
DSP plugin?
Well, if it's shared between DSF and CDI,
then it's really not a DSF feature and I would assume it would be in
org.eclipse.cdt.debug.ui. Is DSF required in CDT 7.0 or can vendors
ship without it if they're only using CDI?
Right. This was discussed in the bugzilla report. It's a matter of moving
files around (and losing their history in cvs) and avoiding it if
possible, especially if it doesn't bring any practical benefit. With the
big push to reach feature parity to make DSF the default CDT debugger
framework, I don't expect DSF to be an optional CDT package in Helios.
Thus my thinking is that we need not worry about the location of the
view. Of course, if a vendor wants to strip out DSF in its distribution,
that becomes an issue, but is that something we expect vendors to do?
Filtering out unwanted features in a product is better done using
capabilities/activities than ripping out plugins, IMO.
John
