On 03/12/17 20:40, Jake Petroules wrote:
Qbs has a global view of the entire project, so there's no need to
qualify the names of your lib1, lib2 dependencies with the name of
the sub-project in which they're defined. I think your idea of a
cleaner syntax could be something of the form:
Depends { names: ["lib1", "lib2"] }
Basically, a condensed syntax that would allow to specify multiple
dependency names in a single depends item, and optionally apply
additional properties to all of those, like so:
Depends { names: ["lib1", "lib2"]; condition: project.hasCoolLibs }
equivalent to:
Depends { name: "lib1"; condition: project.hasCoolLibs } Depends {
name: "lib2"; condition: project.hasCoolLibs }
A "names" property as such would be mutually exclusive with the
existing submodules and productTypes property, as well as the name
property.
However your proposal as-is cannot work as the name of a dependency
must be the name of a product or module, and projects have nothing to
do with this. I don't think trying to add them into the mix would
make any sense, but I think something what I suggested above would
effectively solve the same problem I believe you're looking to do so,
which is to remove redundant syntax (and my proposal requires fewer
characters too :D).
Hi Jakes,
Yes, I sort of knew that project/products have nothing to do with
modules (I don't know why, but i've read something about it).
I like your proposition, it's IMHO a good compromise.
On the other hand you say that "there is no need to qualify a dependency
with the name of the project where it is declared", and it seems to
justify why this is not supported. "Not necessary" doesn't always imply
"not possible". After all there's already similar mechanism with
limitToSubProject (Depends/Project coupling), so why not allowing an
optional syntax, where name refers to a project, and submodules refer to
products from this project. Or maybe in that case, a "project" property
could be use in place of "name" (that would make the Depends item syntax
a bit messy tho). One (wild mind ;)) could imagine something like:
Depends {
project: "MyLibraries"
products: [
"lib1",
...
]
}
I don't know the internals of Qbs, so please excuse me if the above
doesn't make sense to you.
This is not a show stopper for me, just a nice to have. IMHO it keeps
the product.qbs tidy, and is in sync with the concept that you write
code once, but it gets read countless time, so it's good to make it easy
to read/understand.
Is it worth creating a proposal/use-case ticket based on this thread?
Chris
_______________________________________________
Qbs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs
