Re: [cdt-dev] About project properties.

["Alain Magloire" <alain@xxxxxxx>]

> 
> --=_mixed 00705D1A85256D5C_=
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> 
> I wish this was so easy.  What do you do, for example, when a standard 
> make project builds more than one executable, or the same executable for 
> multiple targets.  Providing a single list of symbols, inclusion paths and 
> libraries doesn't make sense for this builder.  Really, the only reason 
> we've done it for inclusion paths and symbols is to help get the parser up 
> and running in the short term.

That's correct, see the now obsolete proposal:

http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cdt-dev/msg00102.html

>  Ideally, we should be getting this information out of the makefile, somehow...

This should be possible, with the managed builder, since it knows about
the information from the Property pages.

Probably not for the "Standard Make" but that's fine, it was not design for this.
We wanted to provide a couple of fields in the property of the "Standard make"
to let the users set this by hand.

Users are encouraged to user the "Managed make" unless they know what there doing
and this case the "Managed make" can be a burden then a help.

> 
> In my journey to define a build model, I have come to the realization that 
> make (and gnu make in particular) does an unbeatable job at controlling 
> builds for C/C++ projects.  That's why, in the end, we're concentrating on 
> a managed make build which, essentially, helps make it easier to create 
> makefiles but through UI or automation.  Anything else would much less 
> than the expressive power that make gives you, particularly with its 
> implicit rules and magic macro substitution (you can't beat OBJS = 
> $(SRCS:$(ROOT)%.c=%.o)).
> 
> I've attached the first draft of my build model doc.  Comments are more 
> than welcome.  If anyone has trouble with Word format, please let me know 
> and I'll rush an HTML version out.

Yes, please, html or text.