Hi,
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 00:46 -0500, Dirk Reiners wrote:
> Hi Gerrit,
>
> Gerrit Voss wrote:
> >
> > but is has some not so nice drawbacks. One thing the build tools are not
> > capable of keeping this dir really up-to-date. Especially if you move
> > or delete files you better not forget to delete the whole include dir.
>
> Why would moves affect it? If you move stuff out of the source tree yes, but
> moving between different dirs in the source tree shouldn't matter, AFAIK.
>
> The remove I see, but I'm not sure why files in the instlinks dir that are
> not
> used (or they couldn't have been removed) make a problem.
well I included renaming into the move part ;-). The problem is that
after you moved the files locally everything still compiles even if some
of the other files still reference the old now non existing files. If
you now change something in the moved/renamed file you will end up with
two different version being seen. Also if I commit these changes it will
break the compilation only for those who do a clean / rebuild cycle.
The underlying problem is that it was the easiest way to use the
compiler to figure out where the moved files were included and this
does not work anymore ;-(. Often I just forget that I better use
emacs `find Source -type f \( -name '*.cpp' -o -name '*.h' \) -exec grep
-q OSGOldFile\.h {} \; -print`
to find these locations ;-)
> > Second, the debugger references the installed include files not the
> > source files. This can be quite annoying as you change things and the
> > rebuild did not catch everything or worse overwrote your changes ;-(.
>
> I can't see how that can happen.
Ah, ok I forgot to mention that I do most of my 'serious' debugging
(that is where I really need a debugger) with Visual Studio because if
there is one piece of software that is better on Windows it is the
debugger (all unix debuggers degraded massively over time IMHO).
So changing the wrong file happens quite easily and bit me a couple of
times so I switched back to edit files outside Visual Studio using
my usual editor ;-(. It works for me but is not really nice and can
be confusing in the beginning.
Actually IIRC which included file was taken also did depend on how it
was found during compilation. In the global directory or locally because
of #include "XXX".
> > So I'm not a 100% convinced that this is mature enough to be used
> > seriously.
> I've been fairly happy with it. Can you give us some more details on what
> wnet
> wrong on your side?
Well on 'fairly' I could agree. It is just a shortcoming I came across
which is not so nice, one has to be aware of and should be solved
somehow (if this is possible in a useful amount of time). But with scons
it is much better than trying the same thing with make ;-). Anyway it
affects just the last 5% (max) that are missing to the 100%
conviction ;-) so nothing to serious, just something to be noted ;-)
And as you can guess if it would have been really serious I already
would have patched something ;-)
gerrit
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
