I don't see how adding a python extension to a python script is a kludge. If anything, it is stranger that SCons scripts do not have their own extension (E.G. *.scons). I understand that make may have started the trend, but that doesn't make it an lead worth following.
V/R, William On Jan 28, 2015 7:30 AM, "anatoly techtonik" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Carnë Draug <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 23 January 2015 at 17:02, Carnë Draug <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 21 January 2015 at 19:55, Bill Deegan <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Carnë Draug < > [email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 21 January 2015 at 13:28, Carnë Draug <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > On 21 January 2015 at 13:15, Gary Oberbrunner < > [email protected]> > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Carnë Draug < > [email protected]> > >>>> >> wrote: > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> ... > >>>> >>> >>> scons [1] is a build system and I was thinking of adding it to > >>>> >>> >>> shared-mime-info. Its files are very simple to identify, > they are > >>>> >>> >>> always named SConstruct or SConscript. These files are also > valid > >>>> >>> >>> python scripts. > >>>> >>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>> Should shared-mime-info identify them (I can submit a git > patch, > >>>> >>> >>> no > >>>> >>> >>> problem) > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> This seems like an easy thing to add, with some possible upside > and no > >>>> >> downside. So why not, I say. Carnë, I think it would be better > for you > >>>> >> to > >>>> >> add it to shared-mime-info; SCons could do it but (a) it would be > more > >>>> >> complex, and (b) it wouldn't identify SConstructs when SCons isn't > >>>> >> installed. > >>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>> > Yes. shared-mime-info seems to agree with, they only need acceptance > >>>> > from > >>>> > scons developers: > >>>> > > >>>> > On 20 January 2015 at 18:32, Jerome Leclanche <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> If a text/x-scons mime type is defined and accepted by the SCons > devs, > >>>> >> it would then be a sub-type of text/x-python. > >>>> >> J. Leclanche > >>>> > > >>>> > So unless someone opposes I will submit a patch to shared-mime-info. > >>>> > Regarding > >>>> > > >>>> > On 21 January 2015 at 01:28, William Blevins <[email protected] > > > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> >> [...] > >>>> >> SConstruct is a required name, but SConscript is not even though > it may > >>>> >> be > >>>> >> the standard/convention. The subscripts can use any name you like > >>>> >> technically. I usually include the "*.py" extension so that > language > >>>> >> bindings in editors work without setting changes. > >>>> > > >>>> > what if the magic uses the following globs for filenames > "SConstruct", > >>>> > "SConscript", and "SConscript.*" ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I have just added a patch for this to bug #87920 [1]. Could someone > >>>> review it please? > >>>> > >>>> I also add 3 new tests based on SCons configuration which I found on > the > >>>> repositories for MongoDB, Battle for Wesnoth, and SCons itself. > >>>> > >>>> Carnë > >>>> > >>> I looked at your patch. Looks good. Only thought I had was you could > >>> probably have much more trivial files as the test files. > >> > >> I thought the same at start but then it occurred me that real, more > >> complex cases > >> are better for testing purposes. The simplest case may be good for > test suite > >> of a library but not for identification of a file mimetype. 'Program > >> ("hello.c")' > >> would be a valid SConstruct file but a complex fle with a lot of python > makes it > >> ambiguous and more likely to be confused with x-python. > >> > >> Could anyone from shared-mime-info comment or accept my commit? [1] > >> > >> Carnë > >> > >> [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87920#c1 > > > > For anyone interested, this has now been accepted into shared-mime-info > [1]. > > > > Carnë > > > > [1] > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xdg/shared-mime-info/commit/?id=29c2eab964cfd8c45fd8a7f5d8407bbc94222095 > > Cool. Is it possible to add masks, such as SC* with lowered priority so > that if > there is no other choice, the SCons type will still be selected? I expect > that > some concepts used by GoDot engine could be adopted by other projects > and IDE support for that that could be useful. > > This also makes SConscript.* mask unnecessary. I've never seen > files like that, and supporting existing SConscript.py kludges seems > wrong. > -- > anatoly t. > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
