[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
| RE: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF Disassembly" | 
I'll take a look at it as well.
 
Thanks,
Warren
  
  Navid, I just committed the changes to HEAD. I'll take you up on 
  your offer to test it :-) I've done quite a bit of testing myself, but more 
  would be better.
John
At 03:33 PM 2/5/2010, Mehregani, Navid 
  wrote:
  Content-Language: 
    en-US
Content-Type: 
    multipart/alternative;
         
    boundary="_000_496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E602AA658233dlee06enttico_"
Great!! 
Let me know if you need help with testing 
    it.
 
Navid
 
    
    From: 
    cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [ mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
    John Cortell
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 9:07 
    PM
To: CDT General developers list.; CDT General developers 
    list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF 
    Disassembly"
 
I've 
    been working this week on refactoring the DSF disassembly view to work with 
    both DSF and CDI and I just had my first CDI session where it appears to be 
    mostly working. (Naturally, I got DSF working first) 
I'm not 
    going to raise the victory flag just yet, though. I'll update again when 
    I've gotten all the features working. Just wanted to let people know work on 
    it is progressing and looking encouraging.
John
At 08:49 AM 
    1/14/2010, Mehregani, Navid wrote:
Content-Language: 
    en-US
Content-Type: 
    multipart/alternative;
         
    boundary="_000_496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E602AA311636dlee06enttico_"
We 
    can open a Bugzilla entry after we determine this to be feasible.
Perhaps 
    we can further discuss this in the next CDT monthly 
    meeting.
 
Thanks,
 Navid
 
    
    From: 
    cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [ mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
    John Cortell
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 5:53 
    PM
To: CDT General developers list.; CDT General developers 
    list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF 
    Disassembly"
 
There is no bugzilla entry for it but feel 
    free to create one. We can use it to record our results.
I'm hoping 
    we will have it done in time for 7.0. We're still trying to determine the 
    feasibility of it, so I can't say for sure it will happen. But I can tell 
    you someone is actively working on it and that we'll keep everyone posted, 
    whichever way it ends up going.
John
At 04:48 PM 
    1/13/2010, Mehregani, Navid wrote:
Content-Language: 
    en-US
Content-Type: 
    multipart/alternative;
         
    boundary="_000_496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E602AA31153Cdlee06enttico_"
Hi John,
 
Is this planned for CDT 7.0? Is 
    there a bugzilla entry for it? 
 
Thanks,
 Navid
    
    From: 
    cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [ mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
    John Cortell
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 5:19 
    PM
To: CDT General developers list.; 
    cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF 
    Disassembly"
 
We are actively working on retrofitting the 
    DSF Disassemby view to work with CDI, thus making the non-DSF one obsolete. 
    If we are successful, this will address your concern, since there will only 
    be one view.
John
At 04:16 PM 1/13/2010, Mehregani, Navid 
    wrote:
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: 
    multipart/alternative;
         
    boundary="_000_496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E602AA31150Cdlee06enttico_"
Hello,
 
Ive used activities to hide CDIs Disassembly 
    view.  Our product is only shipped with DSF Disassembly view.  
    However, our users dont know or care about DSF.  Im sure most CDT users 
    (not developers) really know what DSF/CDI is. 
At first I thought about 
    hiding the DSF Disassembly view via activities and redefining it with a new 
    name, but that doesnt work since DisassemblyView class is in an internal 
    package thats not exported.  I assume the community wouldnt want to 
    export this package?  I obviously dont want to duplicate the code in 
    DisassemblyView and DisassemblyPart.  
 
Does anyone else 
    have this problem? Does it make sense to rename DSF Disassembly to something 
    that would be a bit more meaningful to CDT users? (similar to Memory and 
    Memory Browser views).  
 
Thanks for your 
    help,
 
- 
    Navid
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev 
    mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev 
    mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev 
    mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev 
    mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev