| Re: [cdt-dev] Future of Managed Build |
Nice to see discussion.
The column approach would work fine because all actions of columns
B/C (run all lex commands) must be done before column D/E actions
can start.
Your remark made me see that the new drawing introduced a nice
example of the performance hit the column approach introduces. All
asm and lex can be done at the same time, but due to the model asm
needs to wait untill lex is done.
To work around this one could change the model to the one below;
but this introduces a new and probably even bigger performance
hit.
In this case when there are no lex files the c and cpp
compilation has to wait until assembly is done.
I think it is wise to drop the strict column sequence solution.
Have the sequence purely based on the arrows showing the
"preceding actions". I think it is still a good idea to have the
convention only having arrows go from left to right but there is
no need for the model to enforce it. One can even consider
dropping the columns completely.
To be able to introduce pre/post build and other actions; we can
add "pre and post action" meta data to the columns (if the columns
are dropped we need another way of grouping and add the meta data
to the group).
It seems to me that letting go of the sequence based on the
columns makes introduction of "non file triggered actions"
complicated. Maybe we should simply add the meta data "all things
on the left should be finished before starting to process this
column" (default off) to the column.
I need to think. Hoping for input of the modelling experts.
Jantje
PS I won't be active in the coming days due to other activities.
Thanks Jante - I am glad to see you are considering the lex case in your thought processes. To complicate the picture slightly, the lex output includes header files so it is important, order wise, that the lex happens before the compilation of other sources. So in the updated drawing you still can't run everything in a column in parallel as there are dependencies in that drawing from objects in column C back to column A.
Jonah
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 16:35, Jan Baeyens <jan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_______________________________________________Jonah
Given the responses I think my drawing has been misunderstood. Or maybe I'm all wrong :-). What I drew was an arduino like toolchain in a "non existing modelling tool". A kind of mock-up of what I feel the modelling tool should be capable to do.
When I say that the proposed model is non recursive I mean you can not draw an arrow that goes from right to left which would mean going back in time. As far as I understand lex there is no need to do so.
Assuming that Arduino decides to extend the toolchain to support lex files; I would have to modify the model to look something like below.
Note: even though Wikipedia states lex generates C files I made the model having lex generate both C and CPP files to emphasis the need/power of a filter function in the router.
@Alexander
I'm really wondering what I would need to do to get Sloeber working after I changed the model adding the lex compiler as above.
Modelling a simple library project would look like
Best regards
Jantje
Op 30/01/2020 om 18:01 schreef Jonah Graham:
Hi Jante,
It looks like you have been having some good thoughts on this - hopefully that will continue to spark some good conversation.
> IMHO recursivity at the file level does not exists
I am not sure this is what you are referring to here, but I would expect any new work to be able to handle cases such as lex/y -> c/h -> .o. In the current diagram that would imply arrows from column A -> C -> A -> C -> E.
Jonah
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 17:54, Jan Baeyens <jan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Op 27/01/2020 om 14:47 schreef Alexander Fedorov:
Hello,Great
We (with my good friends @ArSysOp) are working on Toolchain metamodel prototype that should cover the needs of CDT and will be flexible enough to be applied for sibling areas.
Of course there is a number of EMF usage tricks collected through all that years that we are going to use during this work. We know the model-to-text generation technologies from JET to Acceleo, so we will be able to create whatever we need, not only the default Java classes.
This is what I would expect. Basically in toolchain land there are "files" and "tools". There is only a very limited set of combinations you can have with "files" and "tools".
Currently we are polishing things that were presented for Postgres community 1 year ago during the "IDE for stored procedures" talk and discussion. Yes, it may sound curious, but the "toolchain model" idea with all the "target hardware description" and "project structure model" appears to be very similar for a lot of ecosystems.
IMHO recursivity at the file level does not exists and tool sequence is pretty obvious at the model level. However: correct me if I'm wrong.
I have been thinking hard about how to model a gcc toolchain and below is a representation of how I see things now
I haven't yet found a good name for what I called router. It is absolutely crucial to understand router to understand the model. All other stuff is pretty obvious
In it's simplest form router will create a list of "input file; output file" (like "input.cpp" "input.cpp.o"). for each item in the list tool can add a command which results in "input file; output file; command" which -in make world- is called a "rule".
A more complicated router may have multiple input files and multiple output files which means that the router produces a list of "list of input files; list of output files".
Also the tool can produce more than one command so the output of a router tool combinations should be a list of "list of input files; list of output files; ordered list of commands".The router can also filter input files. For instance in the example above the output of the "c to object" tool is send to both the archiver and the linker. It is up to the "collection of routers" to make sure the files are processed at the right place. Given a specific file: the model supports all options (archiver; linker; archiver and linker;none) and assumes the need for coding to support this construction.
The builder can simply go from left to right processing the router/tool columns one by one. Asking the routers the "list of input files; list of output files" checking whether a command needs to be run and if so ask the command to generate the "ordered list of commands" to run. Run these and move on to the next.
Note 1 that the router explicitly names the output file(s).
Note 2 when implementing this model it seems logical to have 2 generic routers ("1 on 1" -fi compile- and "all on 1" -fi archive-) "1 on 1" would need a "name provider" (append .o) and "all on 1" will need a output file (archive.ar). The model above needs "custom build" routers next to the generic ones
Note 3 Looking an the linker input files (which can be object files and archive files) one can argue that the "list of input files' needs to be a "list of lists of input files". One can also argue it is up to the tool to "triage the files". I haven't decided yet what I think is the best.
Note 4: this model assumes there is no order of commands in the column. It behaves as if all the commands from one column can be executed at the same time.
Note 5: the model assumes that all actions in a column must have finished before the next column can be "evaluated/executed". This allows for "non file based commands" like "pre build actions"; "post build actions" to have their own column like demonstrated below
Note 6:I understand that note 4 and 5 are a serious constraint for a more generic modelling tool.
Do you think this will be multi year or multi month project before we get it into CDT?
The plan is to share it on GitHub as a set of Ecore metamodels and then go through several iteration of minor "releases" until we will find good solution. Then we can have it either as a separate Eclipse project or as a part of CDT - this may be decided later.
Regards,
AF
23.01.2020 23:35, Jonah Graham пишет:
P.S. Well, as we started the introduction session ... actually, my family name is Fedorov, from the Greek "Θεόδωρος " you may know it as the Latin "Theodor", that means "God-given" :)
I have no experience with emf modelling so I don't know it is capable enough. I also have no experience getting this in java classes. Help will be needed if we go this way. Learning EMF is now on my todo :-)
Is there some doc from the discussion from Alexander Federov and William Riley?
_______________________________________________ cdt-dev mailing list cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________ cdt-dev mailing list cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________ cdt-dev mailing list cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
