On 11 June 2010 01:36, Nick Treleaven <nick.trelea...@btinternet.com> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:59:11 +1000 > Lex Trotman <ele...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> What I would suggest is that upon project creation you make a complete >> >> >> copy >> >> > >> >> > Thats just what I didn't want to do, remember there are filetype >> >> > commands and execute commands too makes each project copy big. >> >> >> >> Then I would suggest that there are no per-project filetype commands >> >> and you just copy the global ones. In project you care about a set of >> >> files so global/general/non-filetype options are the ones you want to >> >> change. This seems to be the most reasonable solution now. >> > >> > I have argued that project filetype commands are useful, but you have a >> > good argument here. Perhaps the complexity is not worth it when project >> > non-filetype commands could suffice. >> >> You could probably make an argument that non-filetype commands are >> sufficient for C/C++ and other "building a big thing" type languages, >> but other filetypes supported by Geany are more centred around the >> individual file. >> >> And don't think just in terms of compile/link type operations. >> >> I don't think that the potential uses of filetype commands have been >> explored much, even for C/C++ there is code analysis tools, >> prettyfiers, hey I'm giving myself ideas here.. >> >> And then it becomes important to be able to configure them per >> project. Also don't think of it as one project file per source tree, > > The point was that if you want to override the non-project filetype > commands you could do that with project non-filetype commands. > > It might be less nice to use though, so I'm not suggesting implementing > it, just thinking out loud a bit.
Thinking is good, but how would you specify which non-project filetype command would be overridden by which project non-filetype command and not confuse things further? We have to get that terminology sorted out don't we :-) > >> I'm using multiple project files to save the differing configurations >> when using differing tool sets for the same source tree. >> >> We also have the filetype dependent execute commands to consider, >> pointing to the executables in the build directory rather than in the >> source directory is likely to be common. > > I think of those grouped in with filetype commands, they just do > different things :-p True, I just wanted to make sure that they weren't forgotten. > >> >> > >> > I also like the copying non-project commands into the project idea. >> >> Makes the whole thing easier to implement of course, but then for the >> common things, the user has to change it in all project files. >> >> I don't think its a good idea for filetype commands though, and even >> for the executes it is a bit of a load copying all languages just to >> edit one. > > I wasn't suggesting copying those into the project file, but only if we > didn't have project filetype commands (and project filetype execute > commands - phew). > Ok. > Regards, > Nick > _______________________________________________ > Geany-devel mailing list > Geany-devel@uvena.de > http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel > _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel