> On 10 Nov 2007, at 2:24, Chris wrote: > > > As far as I can tell, Codeblocks does not use makefiles. I am > > using GCC but I think Codeblocks uses its own build method. > > Oh, OK. As I said, I don't use CodeBlocks, but I was under the > impression from discussions with others that it did generate > Makefiles "in the background" and that was how it managed its builds. > I am very likely wrong. > > > I realize I could create my own makefile but I really don't want to > > go through that headache. > > Makefiles are pretty easy to write - there is a learning curve, but > it's not *that* steep for the functionality you use most of the time > (like dependency checking!) and the rest of the stuff you can just > ignore :-) > > How many files are in your project, and what are their dependencies? > > > My preferred method would be to pass a flag on the commandline to > > fluid.exe to have it check timestamps between the .fl file and the > > generated source and header files before deciding to update the > > timestamps (which causes them to be recompiled when in actuality > > nothing changed). Maybe there is a command line option? > > There is no such option in fluid. Indeed, I can't offhand think of > any parser or compiler tool I know of that provides that functionality. > Basically, the tools expect that you will only ever call them when > you need them to run - the assumption being that the IDE or Makefile > will have correctly determined which files need to be rebuilt in any > given run. > > In general, you need a Makefile (or equivalent IDE) option that goes > something like this - > > > ..fl.h .fl.cxx: > @echo Passing $< to fluid... > $(FLUID) -c $< > > That rule basically says: > If there is a .cxx or .h file that is needed, but it does not exist, > and there is a .fl file of the same name > -OR- > there is a .cxx or .h file that does exist but is older than a .fl > file of the same name > -THEN- > run the command "fluid -c filename.fl" > > > Which is basically the objective you are trying to attain, I think. > > If the IDE you are using does not provide Makefiles, then it must, > surely, provide some alternate means to handle dependencies. If it > does not, then it is simply not fit for purpose and you should use > something else. > > > Maybe I should modify fluid myself to do this with the hope it can > > get included in future versions. Wouldn't this feature make sense > > for IDE's that do not use makefiles? > > Dependency checking is not the job of the parser/compiler. It is the > job of the build system. In general, a parser can't tell whether it > should run or not - really, all it can do is check the dates of its > input and output files and that is not all that robust an indication > of change. It can't, for example, know about changes to dependent > files elsewhere in the build system that have an influence on the > files the parser is working with, whereas a real build system would > be aware of those changes and able to better decide which things need > re-parsed at any given time. That sort of thing. > > If you want to expend energy in writing dependency checking mods, > you'd be better off making it work in Codeblocks (thereby fixing it > for every parser tool, not just fluid) than in adding some non- > standard extension to fluid. > But, as I say, I find it odd that Codeblocks does not already provide > this ability. That, surely, can not be right? > > -- > Ian > > >
Good point on this functionality should be part of the build system and not Fluid. Maybe Codeblocks does have the functionality and I just cannot find it. I will look again and ask on the Codeblocks forum if I cannot figure it out. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
