Re: [cdt-debug-dev] CDI proposals (on the wiki)

[Matthias Spycher <matthias@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Alain,

It appears one must have a committer account to access the Contribution 
Questionnaire 
<http://www.eclipse.org/legal/ContributionQuestionnairePart1-v1.0.htm>. 
If you could pass on a copy, I would be happy to fill it out and have it 
reviewed by CoWare's legal department.

As for the implementation of (a), using an extension point seems 
overkill IMHO unless there's an added benefit I'm not aware of. The 
primary requirement for us is to display a simple one-line string value 
for a custom aggregate type. One might use the name ICDISimpleType 
instead of ICDIValueType for the marker interface. As an example, we 
would use it like this in our CDI implementation:

public class LogicType extends StructType implements ICDISimpleType {
...
}

And the presentation layer just detects whether a given type implements 
this marker. So it's not really a new concrete type, just a means to 
convert aggregates to a simple string value.

Matthias

Alain Magloire wrote:
>   
> > From: cdt-debug-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-debug-dev-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 11:12 AM
> > To: CDT Debug developers list
> > Subject: RE: [cdt-debug-dev] CDI proposals (on the wiki)
> >
> > There are two reasons why I didn't apply (a):
> > - the main reason: it's two big to apply it without going through the
> > legal procedure, i.e. fill the questionnaire, submit it to the Eclipse
> > legal department and wait for permission.
> >     
>
> According to an email from Matthias, there was no legal barrier to this
> patch, see:
>
>
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cdt-debug-dev/msg01560.html
>
> I've updated the PR with your comments 
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126092
>
> Maybe we can resolve this.
>
>   
> > - I was thinking to add an extension point to allow clients to
> > contribute custom types instead of extending the CDI. It would be great
> > if we implement all C/C++ specific types as contributions and make the
> > base of CDI language independent. I think it's doable
> >
> >     
>
> Hmm ..
> There is an item to use the logical structure and the detail pane to deal
> with this.  Are we overlapping?
>
>   
> > (b) my proposal doesn't cover all changes. See for example the following
> > bugs:
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=122013
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=84934
> > These are minor changes.
> >
> >     
>
> Ok, If we can do this for 4.0 we should move the milestone.
> But #84934 needs a change to CDI also
>
>   
> > But we should also consider to use the source lookup capabilities and
> > access to the symbol information provided by the backend.
> >
> >     
>
> You mention this a few times last year, but I've been so disconnected from
> CDT/Debug that my mind is blank, send me an email to refresh my memories.
>
>
>
>   

--
Matthias Spycher, Principal Engineer, CoWare, Inc.
tel:+1(408)392-8596, fax:+1(408)346-4740, http://www.coware.com

This transmission is intended for the sole use of the individual and entity to whom it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or duplication of this transmission by someone other than the intended addressee or its designated agent is strictly prohibited. If your receipt of this transmission is in error, please notify this company immediately by reply to this transmission and delete it from your computer. Thank You. CoWare