| Re: [cdt-dev] Is there interest in a rewritten managed build? |
|
Hi all, I agree with much of what Alessandro and Erwin has said. Our product currently uses managed build. We have invested heavily in this and on the most part it does what we need. We have requirements from customers that like managed build as it is relatively easy to get started and there is GUI for setting up the build. But now it is old and certainly is not getting much investment. We also have customers that complain about the same things outlined in Alessandro’s mail. It is not easy to use managed build for C.I. and Headless build is not satisfactory for this purpose, etc., etc.
So our requirements have definitely moving towards CMake driven build for us too. Partially I think due to the increase in C.I. usage throughout development teams. While harder to setup for some users – it is transparent and easy to customize and integrate many different tools. So longer term -> “non IDE dependent build system is a must have for us” this will also be our requirement I think. The question I have is whether it is possible to bridge these different types of users. e.g. Provide some simple GUI within the IDE that sits on top of the non-IDE dependent build system. This might make CMake type build a more attractive proposition for novice users. We did start an initiative sometime back to consider this for CDT moving forwards. But sadly we did not make a big enough investment to really get it going. Definitely interested in this discussion moving forwards. Best regards, Mark. From: cdt-dev <cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
Alessandro Fardin I'm a long term CDT USER, me and my team are developing an embedded Iot Gateway. Our code base is largely C/C++ that are cross builded for arm processor we use Linux Ubuntu as HOST developer workstation and minly CDT as our IDE. We have a big C/C++ project, our build system consists of our hand made Makefiles that automates the build, test and of the entire solution. We use the same build system in our CI/CD pipeline. So using a non IDE dependent build system is a must have for us, and I think as said by Erwin is a trend for our industry. Currently we are using the CDT Managed Build project / Makefile Project / Tool Chain Cross GCC. This way CDT invokes our Makefiles and different configurations call different Makefile Targets and includes PATH so that CDT builds up its index and we can navigate easily through the code. The problem is that configuring the project in CDT is not very easy and a bit confusing for a new people The project files could not be saved on the repository because they are changed locally by CDT. I remediate, by committing them in a relevant folder, then a developer checkout the project , then calls a make target that copies the eclipse/cdt project files to the root folder before opening the project with CDT. Another problem is that almost every time we close and reopen the project in CDT, the CDT cross tool settings are lost, and so we need to reconfigure them (fortunately by invoking the target that copy the project files ) Another problem is that it is difficult to integrate some very useful tools like c-lang formatter, C-lang tidy, and other static analysis tools, in order to have a development cycle not IDE dependent. I love CDT, but I confess that it needs some cleaning and simplification. Il giorno ven 13 gen 2023 alle ore 09:55 Waterlander, Erwin <erwin.waterlander@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
Renesas Electronics Europe GmbH, Geschaeftsfuehrer/President: Carsten Jauch, Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered office: Duesseldorf, Arcadiastrasse 10, 40472 Duesseldorf, Germany, Handelsregister/Commercial Register: Duesseldorf, HRB 3708 USt-IDNr./Tax identification no.: DE 119353406 WEEE-Reg.-Nr./WEEE reg. no.: DE 14978647 |