[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [cdt-dev] Is there interest in a rewritten managed build?
|
Thanks for the input. It really is appreciated.
What happened to the efforts to build a new managed build system based on core build anyway? (Where I confess I never contributed either.)
I got confused with newMake. Sorry
As far as I recall (and I'm not reliable) there was a consensus that the
new managed build had to be based on a modelling tool (not on the XML in
plugin.xml). On a CDT meeting someone stated he was working on something
that could be reused for CDT but that would take some months.
So I waited a couple of months and then asked for progress but no one in
the CDT meeting at that time knew what I was talking about.
As I'm not a java programmer, have little eclipse knowledge , have
little CDT knowledge , have no money to spend on this, have no
hierarchical power, have difficulty in even contributing small things to
CDT; there is little I can/could do when resources are needed outside of me.
Then again you can also say that this is the continuation. Basically I
am rewriting MBS; what I initially wanted to do.
As -given the limitations I have- rewriting is the only thing I can do.
Someone posted the cdt-new-managedbuild-prototype code as "work that had
been done". I looked at it but could not take this further. No one else did.
1) Does anyone use (or knows someone who uses) the internal builder?
From Indel, no to both. And in fact, I would be interested in the answer as well, because of the recent interest in https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=72965 where reviewing a patch to the internal builder would be involved.
Thanks for your input.
I do not see any references towards internal builder in that defect. Are you sure you refer to the correct one?
2) Apart from the testing; Does anyone use (or knows someone who uses) the "extension point in a file functionality" ?
>Not sure what you mean by that.
Managed build model components like tool, toolchain, .. typically have 3
ways of construction/loading.
https://github.com/eclipse-cdt/cdt/blob/main/build/org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core/src/org/eclipse/cdt/managedbuilder/internal/core/ProjectType.java#L88
https://github.com/eclipse-cdt/cdt/blob/main/build/org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core/src/org/eclipse/cdt/managedbuilder/internal/core/ProjectType.java#L129
https://github.com/eclipse-cdt/cdt/blob/main/build/org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core/src/org/eclipse/cdt/managedbuilder/internal/core/ProjectType.java#L156
As far as I understand one is to load from the plugin.xml (currently the
only thing left in my code) one is to create in the toolchain editor and
one is to read from "any xml file".
For instances if you create a managedBuild project and open the
.cproject you will see it contains a copy of the "buildDefinition
extension" from the plugin.xml file.
But if you look at
https://github.com/eclipse-cdt/cdt/blob/main/build/org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core.tests/resources/depCalcProjects/test1DepCalc2/test1DepCalc2.zip
you will see the zip contains a .cproject but also a .cdtbuild file.
Here the .cproject does not contain the "buildDefinition extension" but
the .cdtBuild does.
Therefore I conclude MBS has a capability to read the "buildDefinition
extension"from a provided file. I see some rare usage for "expert users"
but it can keep test data out of plugin.xml files. Both are "nice to
have" features for little implementation cost.
So I was wondering whether the "buildDefinition extension in a file"
feature was used outside of the managed build testing suite -or am I
dreaming and is there no such functionality?-.
3) Does anyone use (or knows someone who uses) the toolchain editor (project properties->C/C++ build->toolchain editor)?
>We don’t, and if I remember correctly, deeming it unsuitable was one
of the reasons why we built a system of switching between different
toolchains (different versions of GCC for different targets, and now
also Clang) on top of what is a single toolchain to CDT/MBS. One of
those early decisions that I would want to revisit if we were to start
afresh.
I'm all ears about reasons of the different toolchains. Apart from
having different options for the tools I can't see a benefit. I realize
that this used to be different (way more differences between the tools
and less standardisation) which forced the creation of this extra
component; but I think today the benefit does not outweigh the
disadvantage of using the same name for the provider of the tools as the
linking between the tools.
It is one of the components that -if I do a sloeber only MBS- will be
dropped; because the Arduino framework provides the command line
(including the options) and a folder to the tools.
But when I read "and now also Clang" I think "maybe I'm missing something".
Best regards
Jantje
Op 19/01/2023 om 12:50 schreef Christian Walther:
Jan Baeyens <jan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What happened to the efforts to build a new managed build system based on core build anyway? (Where I confess I never contributed either.)
Good question. I don't know. Never heard about it.
You participated in some of the discussion:
https://www.eclipse.org/lists/cdt-dev/msg33655.html
https://www.eclipse.org/lists/cdt-dev/msg34044.html
https://github.com/eclipse-cdt/cdt-new-managedbuild-prototype
Seeing as William Riley from Renesas was active in it and now Mark from Renesas writes
We did start an initiative sometime back to consider this for CDT moving forwards.
But sadly we did not make a big enough investment to really get it going.
that’s probably what happened.
1) Does anyone use (or knows someone who uses) the internal builder?
From Indel, no to both. And in fact, I would be interested in the answer as well, because of the recent interest in https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=72965 where reviewing a patch to the internal builder would be involved.
2) Apart from the testing; Does anyone use (or knows someone who uses) the "extension point in a file functionality" ?
Not sure what you mean by that.
3) Does anyone use (or knows someone who uses) the toolchain editor (project properties->C/C++ build->toolchain editor)?
We don’t, and if I remember correctly, deeming it unsuitable was one of the reasons why we built a system of switching between different toolchains (different versions of GCC for different targets, and now also Clang) on top of what is a single toolchain to CDT/MBS. One of those early decisions that I would want to revisit if we were to start afresh.
-Christian
