Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] CMainTab ui

Well  I prefer Auto because of my comment above:

>It also by discretion of the launch config delegate to interpret this value and pick
>configuration based on some other logic (rather then application path only)

Because in our case Auto would mean different approach then just based on app path, I don't want to add yet another "Auto" checkbox


On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Understood.

We could even put “Based on C/C++ Application” in the drop down if it is more clear than “Auto”.

Personally, I’m not sure which one I like more.

 

From: laskava@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:laskava@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alena Laskavaia
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 10:12 AM
To: Marc Khouzam
Cc: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CMainTab ui

 

Current DSF delegate in buildBeforeLaunch uses binary path and trying to determine to which build config this binary belongs by checking output folder

(that assumes different build configs use unque output folder)

 

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Sounds good to me.

What does “Select config using C/C++ Application” actually mean anyway?

 

From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alena Laskavaia
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 9:57 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: [cdt-dev] CMainTab ui

 

I would like to get rid of extra checkbox in CMainTab ui for build config selector

called "Select configuration using 'C/C++ Application'" and move it to Combo instead

This is how it looks now

What I am proposing is this:

So "Auto" in this case is same choice as previous checkbox but it uses less space
and less confusing

It also by discretion of the launch config delegate to interpret this value and pick

configuration based on some other logic (rather then application path only)

Thoughts?

(Note: this button is API unfortunately, so I am planning to keep it but make invisible,
programmatic logic of enabling/disabling it will be supported)

 



Back to the top