[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cdt-dev] Why are there 2 places to set up launch modes for codan checkers?
- From: Alex Ruiz <alruiz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:50:07 -0700
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; bh=6ZTr5ye0oSO7ZU8xIi0tDfoRCpBxBF2fZGTlS2c9Zq8=; b=dNNZZkSDt8eqq15nYzpDTsIMWIZgDv4T0Z9shkgJfA0Cvy23HOOVawRw+oTJJw9ssx gLywBNpki8RtWXua+GQoI3bb3ZVK/AN4B7346yIrLCNWeJGHXf6AgAiS5lDzm2XuvXnf nJUl4YdmQD8qzHtAe4K8hcg7eVujMbuBWHHrmNKZS/GdOeC9mXxx9ulexQvqq0DFSykr ILKF0XdtWIV8TeQWkSPLKqZJtr/nb0ULXaQusd6d/5493eLi2T11lx4Zk+IkdOoYywxE r066ChGj8RFBuTc3fWfImMg73Bm6EpCIvpaaTUGIO8u3ZtjHmPvey3dWtsExGgStH4Av 5z9A==
I have filed https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=377983
regarding this issue.
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Alex Ruiz <alruiz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Another question:
> Having this second page for setting launching modes at the project
> level is not consistent with the Codan preference pages at the
> workspace level.
> At workspace level there is no such preference page (I'm referring to
> the screenshot in my previous e-mail.) Why having it only at project
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Alex Ruiz <alruiz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Why there are two places to set up launch modes for codan checkers, at
>> the project level? There is one, which is the regular property page
>> showing individual checkers ("C/C++ General" > "Code Analysis"), and
>> the second one is "C/C++ General" > "Code Analysis" > "Launching"
>> (screenshot attached). Having these two is confusing and potentially
>> error-prone (IMHO). It is pretty hard for me to see the point of the
>> second one, as a regular user.
>> Let's say I select "Run as you type (selected checkers)", while being
>> on this page, I don't know what are the selected pages (they are not
>> shown). Probably it would be better to:
>> 1. Remove the second project property page, or
>> 2. Merge both
>> I'd prefer #1 BTW