[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] "assert" in cdt source vs. java compiler versionsinprojects
|
At 10:15 AM 12/12/2007, Andrew Niefer wrote:
A couple of things
to note here:
1) In general, the source plugins do not contain enough
information to build them. They are mainly for debugging and
browsing purposes, if you want to build, you are better off getting the
projects from CVS.
I have always been able to build CDT and platform plugins by importing
them from the distribution, and I think we should take all reasonable
measures to ensure users can continue to do that. It is possible to
configure the distribution plugin so that an import operation creates a
project with specific build-target settings. Import
org.eclipse.ant.ui and you'll see. Markus's suggestion might
provide the solution. I think it's a mistake to take the position that
users should just build from cvs. You say that as if it's a no brainer,
but I doubt someone who's never done it before would agree. We should
eliminate hurdles for people that want to explore/experiment with
changing code in CDT.
4) By default
asserts are not enabled at runtime, they do nothing unless you run with
the vm argument -ea. It may be more effective to use
org.eclipse.core.runtime.Assert instead.
This subject is probably tangential, but I think a key advantage of using
the built-in Java assert feature is the very thing you imply is a
disadvantage--the ease in which it can be turned on-off at runtime, and
the fact that it's a standard/universal mechanism. I don't know why the
use of a home-grown assert should be necessary or encouraged; it made
sense prior to 1.4 but not now, in my opinion.
John