Home » Eclipse Projects » Dynamic Languages Toolkit (DLTK) » refactoring sources - please let us know
|
| Re: refactoring sources - please let us know [message #33735 is a reply to message #33632] |
Fri, 24 October 2008 07:19   |
 Alex Panchenko
Messages: 342
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Chuck,
Sometimes we have to make incompatible changes if they are required to
implement new features.
Historically the changes are announced on the dltk-dev@eclipse.org
mailing list. I would recommend you to subscribe to it. The link to
subscribe is available on the http://www.eclipse.org/dltk/
site.
These changes were announced on the mailing list and I have posted the
link to the message in the "parsers, builders, build types, and build
participants" news thread. Here is that link again
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/dltk-dev/msg01142.html
Chuck Doucette wrote:
> I appreciate the fact that you guys have developed DLTK and made it open
> source so we can use it.
> I appreciate the fact that you respond to this forum so we know how to use
> it.
> I was told that I should:
> a) be using the latest 1.0 source tree that you are actively developing
> b) use IBuildParticipant and the associated extension point
> Unfortunately, that does not exist in the stable 1.0M2 release - only in the
> latest integration build.
> Thus, I have just upgraded to the integration build.
> In the process - I have discovered many other changes:
>
> 1) The IBuildParticipant interface has changed to use IBuildContext instead
> 2) A while ago - you told me that your AST node would not be updated to
> track line numbers - even though they are available at parse time - and that
> we should use a line tracker.
It depends on the parser if line numbers are provided from it.
Some parsers are just operating on the char arrays and they don't need
to track line boundaries/numbers. The essential information is just the
offset in the source.
> So, I wrote some code o create and use line
> trackers (Eclipse's ILineTracker). Unfortunately, all of that code is moot
> now that you have your own DLTK ISourceLineTracker.
We think that some languages could benefit from the standard
implementation provided by the DLTK. Unfortunately the mentioned
ILineTracker is provided by the org.eclipse.jface.text plugin and we
don't want dltk.core to depend on that plugin, so we have to provide own
interface for the same task.
> So, what I'm asking, is that if you make incompatible changes, please
> announce them so we can be prepared for them when you make the next release
> available.
We try to announce changes, it is just happens in different place - on
the mailing list. Also, most of the technical discussions happens there too.
Regards,
Alex
|
|
|
| Re: refactoring sources - please let us know [message #33769 is a reply to message #33735] |
Fri, 24 October 2008 14:41 |
Charles Doucette
Messages: 125
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Ok - I have subscribed to the dev mailing list.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Chuck
"Alex Panchenko" <alex@xored.com> wrote in message
news:gdrstm$l1n$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi Chuck,
>
> Sometimes we have to make incompatible changes if they are required to
> implement new features.
>
> Historically the changes are announced on the dltk-dev@eclipse.org mailing
> list. I would recommend you to subscribe to it. The link to subscribe is
> available on the http://www.eclipse.org/dltk/
> site.
>
> These changes were announced on the mailing list and I have posted the
> link to the message in the "parsers, builders, build types, and build
> participants" news thread. Here is that link again
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/dltk-dev/msg01142.html
>
> Chuck Doucette wrote:
>> I appreciate the fact that you guys have developed DLTK and made it open
>> source so we can use it.
>> I appreciate the fact that you respond to this forum so we know how to
>> use it.
>> I was told that I should:
>> a) be using the latest 1.0 source tree that you are actively developing
>> b) use IBuildParticipant and the associated extension point
>> Unfortunately, that does not exist in the stable 1.0M2 release - only in
>> the latest integration build.
>> Thus, I have just upgraded to the integration build.
>> In the process - I have discovered many other changes:
>>
>> 1) The IBuildParticipant interface has changed to use IBuildContext
>> instead
>> 2) A while ago - you told me that your AST node would not be updated to
>> track line numbers - even though they are available at parse time - and
>> that we should use a line tracker.
>
> It depends on the parser if line numbers are provided from it.
> Some parsers are just operating on the char arrays and they don't need to
> track line boundaries/numbers. The essential information is just the
> offset in the source.
>
>> So, I wrote some code o create and use line trackers (Eclipse's
>> ILineTracker). Unfortunately, all of that code is moot now that you have
>> your own DLTK ISourceLineTracker.
>
> We think that some languages could benefit from the standard
> implementation provided by the DLTK. Unfortunately the mentioned
> ILineTracker is provided by the org.eclipse.jface.text plugin and we don't
> want dltk.core to depend on that plugin, so we have to provide own
> interface for the same task.
>
>> So, what I'm asking, is that if you make incompatible changes, please
>> announce them so we can be prepared for them when you make the next
>> release available.
>
> We try to announce changes, it is just happens in different place - on the
> mailing list. Also, most of the technical discussions happens there too.
>
> Regards,
> Alex
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Sep 14 10:54:41 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.05203 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
