Improving qmake-qt4 support in KDevelop3.4

Andreas Pakulat apaku at
Wed Jul 26 01:17:45 UTC 2006

On 25.07.06 19:54:57, Matt Rogers wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 18:17, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > On 25.07.06 19:44:35, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > > On 24.07.06 19:19:42, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > > > buildtools/projectmanager should be ignored for the KDevelop 3.x
> > > > series.
> > >
> > > And buildtools/lib/parsers as well, I guess? Because I can only see the
> > > parser beeing used in buildtools/projectmanager/qmake and nowhere else.
> >
> > Having looked a bit at the parser, I've got one last question: Are there
> > objections against using it for qmake4 support? I think it would make
> > things easier for me as I don't have to fully understand the FileBuffer
> > (which seems to be the parser for qmake projects atm) class, I'd only
> > have to provide similar functionality using the AST...
> I don't really have any objections. I'm a bit concerned about how long it's 
> going to take, since I don't really know when the release is going to be now. 

As said on IRC I'll ask adymo.

> How long is it going to take, do you think?

Well, currently I have no idea.
Looking at the FileBuffer stuff freaked me out a bit, because it somehow
looks like a qmake parser, but not quite.. That's why I thought it might
be easier if I can get an AST for a project file, instead of working
with "search for a string in the file which contains 'QT'...".

The first problem is that the qmake buildtool doesn't generate a propert
value for QT variable, this is my first goal to fix and should be doable
in time. It needs a change in the configuration ui, which is the reason
why I think a separate new buildtool for qmake4 would be better than
trying to "integrate" the change into the existing qmake buildtool.


You will always get the greatest recognition for the job you least like.

More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list