[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [cdt-dev] Build model proposal
|
>
> <html>
> <br>
> Hi!<br><br>
> Fair enough, but if you are only looking at the model, you are ignoring
> the biggest focus of an IDE: the UI. I can get access to C compilers
> without an UI already and I don't have to run a JVM to get it. <br><br>
> Contributed toolchains without contributed UI's to configure the tools
> are useless in an IDE. <br><br>
> Thanks!<br>
8-)
You are correct, the UI is the biggest work.
But that is not what Sky was referring, he was talking about the separation
between the model and the presentation. You separate the algorithms,
the data from how you represent the data. JDT and Eclipse in general
use that design pattern (MVC).
In JDT, the model, the AST, the compiler etc are define in
jdt.core and how it represented in jdt.ui(views, properties, tabs etc..),
same thing for the debug, debug.core, debug.ui.
This is also reflected in Eclipse, were you have one UI thread, the build
for example can be start in a non-UI thread and trying to grab any
SWT widget will get you a NPE(null pointer exc). We can break
the encapsulation by posting async() to the Display.
In any case, its just a heads up, sometimes people are asking why we
name the plugins *.core or *.ui (ex cdt.core, cdt.ui, cdt.debug.core ...)
> -Chris<br><br>
> At 05:43 PM 12/17/2002 -0500, Matthews, Sky wrote:<br><br>
> <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font size=2>You need to separate
> the model (APIs to get/set the compiler properties, switches, etc.) from
> the UI that provides user view/access to the model. What if we wanted to
> build a headless version? :-)<br>
> </font><br>
