On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Doug Schaefer <
cdtdoug@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> My hope is that when the user hits run, it never asks him for anything, it
> just runs a local application determined by the context of the selection and
> assuming the application can run locally, which we should also be able to
> determine. There should never be a question on what debugger integration to
> use for run because it doesn't matter.
> I think the same should be true for Debug. We should be able to tell from
> the context of the selection what debugger to run. And that decides what
> integration to use, not the other way around. This is something I've stated
> before, and I still stand by it.
> I just think we've hijacked launch configuration types for debugger
> integrations. There should be only be one for Local Applications, and the
> choice of debugger integration is further down the pipe. We should never put
> the choice of debugger integration into the face of the user. There's no way
> they can understand the choice.
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Marc Khouzam <
marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From:
cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > [mailto:
cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
>> > Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 2:18 PM
>> > To: CDT General developers list.
>> > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] DSF/CDI Launchers weirdness
>> >
>> > I find the whole thing a bit weird. What this is showing is
>> > that the Eclipse Launch system, didn't anticipate that there
>> > would be multiple launch configurations types for a given way
>> > of launching. As there shouldn't be more than one config type
>> > to "Run" a C++ Local Application (they all do the same
>> > anyway, no?), there probably shouldn't be more than one
>> > config type to "Debug" a C++ Local Application. We've
>> > abstracted at the wrong level and that's just confusing as
>> > hell. Our users won't get it. And our vendors still won't use
>> > what we provide.
>>
>> The terminology always confuses me so I might have mis-understood
>> what you meant, but here goes:
>>
>> We only have one launch configuration type for Run:
>> "C/C++ local application".
>> After you've chosen this launch config type, you have to
>> choose which debugger integration using the hyperlink at the
>> bottom of the launch tabs.
>>
>> For Debug, it is not great but necessary.
>> But for Run? Do we really need to have that extra step?
>> I say we have a single launch delegate when using Run.
>>
>> Does it make sense?
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Sorry, just venting, and a bit sad that the situation hasn't
>> > improved any in 7.0. It's still quite a mess.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Marc Khouzam
>> > <
marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > I think the problem becomes visible because you have EDC.
>> > When I don't have EDC and I select Run As, there is no prompt
>> > and the program launches using CDI. This is fine
>> > because there is actually no debugging going on.
>> >
>> > Once you have EDC, I believe the platform no longer knows
>> > which between CDI and EDC to choose, and that is why
>> > you get the prompt.
>> >
>> > So, maybe adding support in DSF-GDB for Run, may not be
>> > the right solution.
>> > Do we really want to have the user need to choose a
>> > debugger integration
>> > even for Run? Why choose between CDI, DSF-GDB or EDC,
>> > when there will
>> > be no debugging?
>> >
>> > How about a single launch delegate for Run, for all of CDT?
>> >
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From:
cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > [mailto:
cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>> > Alena Laskavaia
>> > > Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 12:39 PM
>> > > To: Pawel Piech
>> > > Cc: CDT General developers list.
>> > > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] DSF/CDI Launchers weirdness
>> > >
>> >
>> > > Well it has EDC there too in the list for Run. I
>> > don't know if it is
>> > > different but it technically I pick EDC for run
>> > instead of standard
>> > > launch.
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Pawel Piech
>> > > <
pawel.piech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > > This appears to be a bug in the multiple launchers support
>> > > in platform.
>> > > > Could you file it as a bug?
>> > > >
>> > > > I think the correct behavior would be for the launch
>> > > framework to use CDI
>> > > > without prompting you whenever you select the run.
>> > > > -Pawel
>> > > >
>> > > > Alena Laskavaia wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I was playing a bit with debugger lately and work flow is
>> > > really awkward
>> > > >> for me.
>> > > >> I don't have official build I am running from the trunk
>> > > but what I see is
>> > > >> weird.
>> > > >> So looks like DSF does not have a "Launcher" (the
>> > stuff you switch
>> > > >> using link in the bottom) for Run
>> > > >> configuration, but does for Debug. So I have to pick
>> > > different ones for
>> > > >> Run
>> > > >> and Debug. So I compile my app and do Run As->Local C++
>> > > App - and it gives
>> > > >> me list which does not include DFS - so I pick standard.
>> > > When I debug
>> > > >> I have to do it again to switch to DSF. If I do opposite -
>> > > pick DFS from
>> > > >> Debug -
>> > > >> when I do Run - my launch for run - does not do
>> > anything, cannot be
>> > > >> terminated and
>> > > >> deleted, and if I open launch configuration it shows that
>> > > I use DSF -
>> > > >> which is not in the
>> > > >> list if I click on link.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Is it expected behaviour?
>> > > >> _______________________________________________
>> > > >> 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
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
