On Friday, 20 March 2015 at 14:36:51 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I wasn't referring to the vim vs IDE holy debate. I often use
IDE myself but never use interal build systems tied to IDE -
mostly for portability reasons. It is good to know that your
project will always be built the same way - on local
development box, in packaging script, on headless CI box.
Which is one of the reasons I use CMake ^_^. It ensures the build
button in your IDE behaves the same as make, regardless of which
box the code is built on.
Semantics analysis you can get by simply opening .d file in
CDT project is very limited compared to opening dub project
because it can't know the import paths for dependencies or
pretty much anything about project structure apart from
opened file. This isn't much.
It seems you are right that it *is* limited, but it shouldn't
be. CMake emits include/import paths into the project
structure. I had thought it emitted into .project, but
evidently emits into .cproject. If DDT supported a .dproject I
could also emit, I could get it to work.
.dproject is exactly dub.json
As I said in my response to Bruno earlier, this still requires
dub for things to work, which isn't an acceptable solution. A
real .dproject would not require tools outside of Eclipse/DDT to
function, and would preferably be similar to .project and
.cproject.
I don't really understand the part about putting paths to
.project though
That was a misunderstanding of Eclipse internals on my part. When
the basic case of completing symbols from phobos worked, I just
assumed that those include directories were being written to a
portable place, since I hadn't done anything special for Eclipse
project generation.
how it can possibly put something that is language specific
there?
Include directories are not language specific, at least not in
CMake.
