Review Request 117835: Now IDM (Includes/Defines manager) provides all types of includes/defines, not just user-specified. (kdevplatform)

[Milian Wolff]

> On April 29, 2014, 12:05 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
> > I think this change makes the development of project managers more complex for no reasons.
> > 
> > I don't think project managers should be aware of the includes you want to bypass to the language support.
> 
> Sergey Kalinichev wrote:
>     >I don't think project managers should be aware of the includes you want to bypass to the language support.
>     
>     Huh? I think I lost the thread... What are you talking about?
> 
> Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
>     I'm saying that I don't think an implementation of a project manager should need to be aware of IDefinesAndIncludesManager. You can have the implementations of IDefinesAndIncludesManager to access the IBuildSystemManager interface or whatever the user defined.
>     
>     To put it differently, what's the point of implementing a buildsystem manager without includes and defines?
> 
> Milian Wolff wrote:
>     Aleix, I'm with Sergey here. At least two of our project managers already don't implement this interface. With the new plugin to define custom include paths/defines, it might be even more eventually.
>     
>     Then, thinking about the future, we need some kind of interface for other plugins to implement to provide more defines/include paths. Esp. for cross compile toolchains, we must be able to define different compilers to grab the default includes/defines from etc. pp. As such, I think the approach given here goes into the right direction.
>     
>     And, furthermore, what differences does it make from a IBSM pov? It could just implement the new interface and register itself to the IDAIM, no? I don't think its making things overly complex compared to before?
> 
> Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
>     My fear is that IBSM might become an ugly beast like ILanguageSupport where semantics are specified in random places and you need somebody who has spent several years in the project just to get another language supported.
>     
>     I don't really have the energy to get this correctly, so please, at least document the shit out of this. :D
> 
> Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
>     Disregard my comment, ship it when the threading issues are solved.

I now workarounded the threading issues. Please cleanup this patch (remove the friend, call the function with the assertion). Everything should work now, I hope.

Cheers


- Milian


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/117835/#review56868
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 28, 2014, 11:03 a.m., Sergey Kalinichev wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/117835/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 28, 2014, 11:03 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDevelop.
> 
> 
> Repository: kdevplatform
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The changes include extending IDM interface and removing i/d notion from IBuildSystemManager interface.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   language/interfaces/idefinesandincludesmanager.h ab42444 
>   project/interfaces/ibuildsystemmanager.h 241b696 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/117835/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sergey Kalinichev
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20140430/9471642b/attachment.html>