Hi Thomas,
I’m not planning on making any
changes to the existing functionality:
- The error parser extension
point
- The discovery of error parsers
- The way that Standard Make
projects currently deal with error parsers (UI, invocation, etc.)
I certainly will not do so without
consulting the mailing list.
Thanks,
Leo
-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Thomas Fletcher
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004
8:38 AM
To: 'cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Managed
Make build system and Error Parsers
And just to throw a few
cents in of my own, we should make sure that the ErrorParser API is
going to more or less
remain as is for the 2.0 before we go and make changes. I know that
Dave I was looking at
making changes in this area, though I _think_ that they were mostly
internal changes and not
changes with respect to the discovery and manipulations of which
error parsers are
available.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Sean Evoy
[mailto:sevoy@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004
8:20 AM
To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Managed
Make build system and Error Parsers
Leo,
By
all means, let's make this part of a toolchain specification. From the short
amount of time I spent in the error parser code area, my impression was that
the default behaviour of the core is a best-effort attempt to find the error
parser from a list of known parsers. That's why the managed build still has its
output parsed even though there is no formal UI support.
Basically,
under your proposal the manifest would supply zero or more error parsers to
that list through the managed build system. We would need to expose this list
to the user through the UI, implying a new property page (or a tab on the
managed build property page, or some error parser browse button, or...), a
preference page, and a new tab on the new project wizard. Compatibility will
not be an issue (from what I can see) since the system just adds error parsers.
I would think that at some point, there may be a request for some way to
override or remove known parsers, but that can be deferred. The default in the
absence of any new definitions is to use the default list, only now the user
will be able to reorder or remove some if that is what they want.
Sean
Evoy
Rational Software - IBM Software Group
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
"Lott, Jeremiah"
<jeremiah.lott@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent
by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
03/24/2004 06:03 PM
Please
respond to
cdt-dev
|
|
To
|
<cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [cdt-dev] Managed Make build system and
Error Parsers
|
|
This looks good to me. My only question is
about backward-compatability. What will the behavior be for projects that
are already created, but don't have an error parser set? Also what is the
behavior for targets in the extension that don't have any error parsers
associated with them?
Jeremiah Lott
TimeSys Corporation
-----Original
Message-----
From: Treggiari, Leo [mailto:leo.treggiari@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 6:04 PM
To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cdt-dev] Managed Make build system and Error Parsers
I was
surprised to learn recently that the CDT Error Parser
functionality
is not used in the same manner by the Standard
Make
and Managed Make build systems. From what I can tell:
o
Standard Make:
- Allows the user to set the default for error parsers to be
used and in what order in the Window -> Preferences -> C/C++
-> New Make Projects -> Error Parsers tab.
- When a new Standard Make project is created, allows the user
to modify the default settings for the new project using the
same UI.
- Allows the user to change the settings for the project in the
project Properties using the same UI.
- During a build, uses the project settings to determine which
error parsers to invoke and in what order.
o
Managed Make:
- Doesn't do any of the above.
- During a build, uses all error parsers and I don't think there
is any way to control the order.
I sent
mail to Sean a couple of days ago asking if he was in favor
of me
investigating adding the error parser functionality to the
Managed
Make build system, and he said OK. Having investigated
further,
I've decided that the Managed Make support should be
implemented
somewhat differently.
The
per-project support should be the same - that is, it can be set
during
project creation and changed by editing the project properties.
The
difference would be in the project default. It
seems
to me to be more appropriate for each "target" (or "tool
chain")
being defined for the Managed Make build system to specify
the
default list and order of the error parsers needed by the
"tool
chain". This could be specified by each "tool chain" in
the
plugin.xml
file where the information for the "tool chain" is
provided
(for example, the "binary parser" and the command line
options.
Comments?
Leo
Treggiari
Intel
Corp.