[Kde-bindings] How to properly install new generator?

[Arno Rehn]

On Monday 01 February 2010 21:21:32 Richard Dale wrote:
> On Monday 01 February 2010 07:58:52 pm Ian Monroe wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Arno Rehn <arno at arnorehn.de> wrote:
> > > On Monday 01 February 2010 20:22:10 Richard Dale wrote:
> > >> On Monday 01 February 2010 07:04:11 pm Arno Rehn wrote:
> > >> > On Monday 01 February 2010 12:45:09 Richard Dale wrote:
> > >> > > On Friday 29 January 2010 10:52:19 pm Arno Rehn wrote:
> > >> > > > On Friday 29 January 2010 23:43:12 Melton, Ryan wrote:
> > >> > > > > After compiling the new kdebindings generator, what is the
> > >> > > > > proper command or procedure to install it? Thanks,
> > >> > > > > Ryan
> > >> > > > 
> > >> > > > It's not yet intended to be installed.
> > >> > > 
> > >> > > Well I think it's quite important that we install it for KDE 4.4
> > >> > > because for KDE 4.5 we want to encourage everyone to create smoke
> > >> > > libraries in their own KDE svn modules. If we don't install the
> > >> > > generator that will make that plan more complicated.
> > >> > > 
> > >> > > If we want to install it I think it needs a more distinctive name
> > >> > > that 'generator'. For example:
> > >> > > 
> > >> > > kgenerator
> > >> > > smokegen
> > >> > > smokegenerator
> > >> > > smokeapigen
> > >> > 
> > >> > Maybe something like kwrappergenerator?
> > >> 
> > >> Well we've never used the word 'wrapper' in anything we've done
> > >> before. Maybe 'kbindingsgenerator'.
> > > 
> > > Yes, kbindingsgenerator sounds like a good name to me.
> > > 
> > >> > I don't really want to have "smoke"
> > >> > 
> > >> >  in the name, but something more distinctive than only "generator".
> > >> 
> > >> I've no idea why you don't want to use the name 'smoke' as it's a
> > >> pretty important part of the smoke language bindings. But as long as
> > >> it ends up being installed so people will be able to widely use it, I
> > >> think that is more important than the name.
> > > 
> > > Well, that's because the thing is designed to be able to do more than
> > > just generate smoke libraries. Maybe I'm a bit pedantic here (since
> > > it's current job is to only generate smoke), but as long as we have
> > > other names that shouldn't be too much of a problem ;)
> > 
> > But it doesn't depend on KDE, only on Qt 4. So qbindingsgenerator
> > would make more sense.
> 
> I guess that's why I originally suggested 'smokegen' or similar as it
> doesn't have any confusing 'K's or 'Q''s in it. Well alright it does have
> a little 'k' in the middle, but it doesn't shout 'K'ness at you..
> 
> Note that the 'brand' Smoke can mean anything we choose it to mean, and the
> things that the generator might generate in the future could be called
> 'smoke_something' even if they weren't actually Smoke libraries. For
> example, it is most likely to be extended to generate documentation for
> the apis in the Smoke libraries based on the doc comments in the headers.
Hm, sounds good. I didn't even think about redefining the meaning of 'SMOKE'. 
It could then even be used as a verb, i.e. you just 'smoke' kdecore, or 
'smoke' the kdecore docs (in the C# or ruby pipe ;)). Sounds like a really 
good thing to me :).
If noone objects, I'll rename the generator in both trunk and branch 4.4.

-- 
Arno Rehn
arno at arnorehn.de