Ticket #14 (new task)

Opened 3 years ago

Last modified 3 years ago

(Improve|create new) TIGCC project format

Reported by: debrouxl Owned by: somebody
Priority: major Milestone: Version 1.00
Component: project Version: 0.96
Keywords: Cc:

Description (last modified by debrouxl) (diff)

The combination (TIGCC IDE|KTIGCC) + TPR has several well-known drawbacks. (At least) the following shortcomings of (TIGCC IDE|KTIGCC) + TPR should be addressed:

  • behaviour with relative paths...
  • strange behaviour under Vista (  http://www.yaronet.com/posts.php?s=113339 ,  http://www.yaronet.com/posts.php?s=113763 )
  • the '1 project = 1 compilation of a given program' mantra is horrendous when there are MANY programs (ExtGraph?: 33 demos + 1 other test program, this number will increase);
  • TPRs don't make it simple to compile subsets of the program with different compilation options (TI-Chess). I mean, multiple TPRs that make function archives and link everything together is rubbish :D
  • TPRs are not designed for multiple compilations, e.g:
    • on-calc-incompatible programs (mostly all TICT programs);
    • multiple language localizations (TI-Chess, TICT-Explorer).
  • Handle 'verbose' mode of tprbuilder and the tools it calls. The current KTIGCC doesn't understand verbose mode and thinks many things went wrong...

See also ticket #13: some of these shortcomings can be solved by at least one third-party generic (therefore more heavyweight) IDE.

NOTE: since the TPR format is so widely used, backwards compatibility MUST be kept.

Change History

comment:1 Changed 3 years ago by debrouxl

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:2 Changed 3 years ago by debrouxl

  • Component changed from component1 to project

comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by godzil

  • Version set to 0.96
  • Type changed from enhancement to task
  • Milestone set to Version 1.00

We should discuss this on the wiki (or forum but anyway the informations must be on the wiki at the end) if we do this.

comment:4 Changed 3 years ago by godzil

By the way, the TPR should be kept as legacy, but we could provide a way to "upgrade" TPR project to the new format (and provide a way to export a new format project to the TPR format

comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by debrouxl

Strange behaviour under Vista is now tracked as a single item, in ticket #32.

comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by debrouxl

Posted on the ML by squalyl:

some propositions

  • gcc4ti projects should be in xml form
  • gcc4ti projects should not decorrelate physical directories and project directories (this one is really ugly X_X)
  • gcc4ti projects should support relative directories, based on project file path. When adding source files (c/h/s/asm), path mode should be relative. When adding library files, the user should have the option to choose between relative and absolute paths. (inspired by codeblocks)

I tend to agree on all three items, even if I'm not extremely fond of XML for simple usages. Your thoughts ?

Because the discussion may be easier on yAronet than in this tracker, I created  http://www.yaronet.com/en/posts.php?s=117155 .

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.