On 29 Jun 2006, at 19:57, Richard Stallman wrote:
I do not understand what "dependencies" refers to in the context of Bison. Are we talking about the same thing?Oh, sorry, it should have been "file dependencies", i.e., how thefile modification dates relate among files calling each other. When using 'make', these file dependencies are written down explicitly by giving the filesystem location of the files in the 'make' file, and'make' then checks the file modification dates, and if a dependent file has been modified, the associated action (like a compile) is initiated. I know how Make works, but what I don't see is how it is relevant to the issue at hand. We're talking about a development interface for Bison grammars. Why are you bringing all this stuff which relates to Make?
Satya initially detailed how he thought the development work should proceed, so:
Now, the IDE's typically allows one to not having to write down these file dependencies explicitly, but merely indicating the source file.The IDE will then scan the source file for constructs such as '#include <filename>", identifying the file with file name'filename', adding it to the list of file dependencies of the sourcefile, and also doing this recursively in the included file. It seems like you are proposing an IDE for Makefiles. That might be useful, but shouldn't you discuss it with the Make maintainers, instead of the Bison maintainers?
And in this context, you are right: I think that if the proper development work is put at the appropriate place, the work for doing this GUI support of Bison will be relatively limited. On the other hand, if it is not done that way, doing the things that Satya has in mind for only Bison directly will involve too much work.
Hans Aberg
