Re: [cdt-dev] Build System redo

[Alena Laskavaia <elaskavaia.cdt@xxxxxxxxx>]

My 2c is that I don't think we need to get rid of internal builder. I think we should just make clear

interface between build configuration and actual build system, so its easily swappable.

And +2 for replacing xml madness with API's. XML is there for de-coupling and lazy loading.

When we start dealing with multiple inheritance in xml its clearly overboard... (and good luck debugging it)

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Just to a couple more thoughts. I¹m actually pretty happy with the build
model, the proper one, IConfiguration and friends. It¹s really things like
ICConfigurationDescription and friends that I have issues with. It¹s an
additional layer where people have lost their souls trying to figure out
:), and it¹s really that layer that causes most of our problems.

Also, the build model needs to be in the cdt.core so we can generically
get at build information from core features that need it, like the
indexer/parsers. And maybe that¹ll simplify things like the language
settings providers, like scanner discovery actually populating the build
model, and maybe replacing things like IIncludeEntry from the CModel with
include items from the build model.

Doug.

_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev