>-----Original Message-----
>From: Eugene Zhuravlev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>But then it won't be "synchronize output directory", because this is what
>the option exactly does:
>synchronizing _project_ sources with the classes in the output 
>sirectory.

I'm not following here.  You say it wouldn't be "synchronize output
directory" because the option does a certain thing.  Well that is what is
does now but that's exactly what I'm suggesting: change it.  Make it
"synchronize _source_ sources with the classes in the output directory".  My
point here is you speak as if the words "synchronize output directory"
dictate that it be the project directory that is synchronized, but I think
you'll agree that completely depends on what "output directory" means to
you.  You say "synchronize output directory" and then make a leap to
"synchronizing _project_ sources".  You can only make that leap because
you've already assumed that an output directory is associated with only a
single project.

To me, it certainly does NOT imply project directory.  As I said before, I
think it is a fallacy to think that an output directory is exclusive to a
given project.  As a matter of fact, I expect that it is not uncommon to
find people have a number of Idea projects for one source tree.  I suspect
that these projects end up following along the lines of the Java  packages
in the source directory.  All of these are, for obvious reasons, going to
have the same output directory.  

>You could try to include these sources in the project but 
>exclude them from
>the compilation (File | Project Properties | Compile).

This would be _far_ from ideal as I would have to exclude a large number of
directories in every project.  Plus, as soon as someone adds another
directory parallel to the project root (by, for example, adding another
package) I would have to know to exclude that directory, in every project.
It is also a little counter to one of the reasons I use several packages
which is the memory use of Idea caused when I have one project for the
entire tree.

Another reason having a single project is impractical for me is that
assuming that everything under a root directory should be built is invalid
for our tree and having to exclude all the directories that shouldn't be
built would be a good bit of work.  Having the ability to exclude a pattern
would be nice.  All our test trees, for example, start with "test" for just
this reason.  I wished we used Ant to do our builds, then this wouldn't be a
big deal, but we use make and no one is going to change that just for me or
my IDE.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
Eap-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.intellij.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-list

Reply via email to