> 
> Still a pretty unusual setup. Doesn't your Linux have X? 
> 
unfortunatelly I dont have/cannot add X on my setup, that's why I'm 
cross-debugging...

> Anyway, there is nothing wrong with that per se, but maybe
> try to
> understand that the focus is on more common or even
> "normal" setups. And
> I'd go so far and call Windows->Linux crosscompilation
> and debugging
> "normal" even if it's not well supported right now.
> 

the pontential is right there I thing qt-creator should consider this scenario. 
There are applications out there doing exactly the same thing as a VisualStudio 
Add-on; (WinGdb) it is a pay app + you  cannot use the VS express versions. 

> > Cross-debugging Android is another very
> > interesting scenario for qt-creator....
> 
> [And maybe already even supported by Bogdan's port? I
> haven't seen
> it in real life so far, though.]
> 

I haven't seen it either.


> 
> You are abusing the tool. Start and Attach to Remote
> Application was
> meant for "Let's have a quick look on what does this app on
> that
> device", without the need to have a proper project. By
> deciding to
> not use projects and sessions you are depriving yourself of
> the
> possibility to use project information to start the
> debugger.
>
I think this does not make much sense; when you start a remote application,  
you allways need: the debugger, the local app binary, the sysroot, the 
"sources", etc, etc. A bunch of info for every start, Can't you see that that 
info should come from a project file? that dialog box has 7 fields and the 
missing current directory gives 8, there's nothing quick about a test that 
requieres a dialog box with 8 fields in order to run...

  
> > > > 3) qt-creator does not save the breakpoints
> to the project file,
> > > > it would be very handy saving them, if not I
> have to reset
> > > > breakpoints every time I start a new
> debugging session....
> > > 
> > > Breakpoints are saved in the session. See
> > > 
> > > http://doc.qt.nokia.com/qtcreator-snapshot/creator-project-managing-sessions.html
> 
> > in my humble opinion I think the "sesion" file should
> be the project
> > file itself, here Visual Studio does a good job. Why
> to split the
> > project data on a project file and a "sesion" file
> independently
> > handled??? I don't know, am I missing some point
> here?
> 
> Breakpoint data is not "project data".
> 
>
> The project file is meant to be shared with colleagues and
> to
> be put into revision control systems. That's not the place
> where
> _your_ breakpoints should go. Still you'd like to persist
> them for
> your own convenience. That's what the sessions are for.
> 
well, I respectfully disagree... if I have to share a project file I can (if I 
really want) strip breakpoints in just one command...
>From an OO point of view I think IDE development should be project file 
>centered, the main "object" when I work on my IDE is the project entity and I 
>expect when I load/save my project, all the info related to my interaction 
>with the object "myProjectXXX" be stored "within" the "object".... Splitting 
>the concept of project and session on an IDE app does not sound as good design 
>to me.
A session "object" is a good concept for an app like Putty, where the main 
object is really a terminal emulation "session"

thanks
Pat


      
_______________________________________________
Qt-creator mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator

Reply via email to