[fpc-devel] RTTI unit
Michael Van Canneyt
michael at freepascal.org
Mon Aug 30 12:09:43 CEST 2010
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 30.08.2010 11:23, schrieb Michael Van Canneyt:
>>> It might be practical to extend Lazarus (and maybe the other IDEs as
>>> well) to auto search for an extrafpc.cfg in the same dir as the
>>> program file so that it is used automatically.
>> That presupposes that the use of extrafpc.cfg is a common thing. It is
>> not, this is something that Graeme uses.
> But it's a format that is understood by the compiler and does not rely on an
> "external" IDE. May be it should be made common instead of IDE specific
> project files.
> Don't get me wrong here: I am not against the usage of LPI files in the FPC
> sources (because I'm using Lazarus), but Graeme raised a valid point: not
> everyone uses Lazarus and thus we might think about using a file format that
> can be used by more IDEs than just Lazarus. The config file might be such a
> format, but it depends on the support by the involved IDEs (FP IDE, Lazarus,
It is IMHO not suitable, because it does not contain information on the
actual project files. It's just suitable to guide compilation.
>>> Does identifier search/completion work in Lazarus if you use a
>>> extrafpc.cfg to define search paths?
>>> Another possibility would be to extend fpcmake to generate different
>>> IDE project files besides the Makefile as well.
>> fpcmake will be phased out, it's a bad idea to extend it.
> Right you are.
> What about fppkg then? Would it be a feasible idea or a valid task to let it
> create project files for different IDEs?
Definitely not, that would be the opposite of what we try to achieve:
get fppkg support into the IDEs.
So in fact the solution is simple; provide a fpmake.pp file, and let the IDE's
figure it out from there.
We'll take that as a rule for contributions from now on :)
I'll discuss this in the FPC core list.
More information about the fpc-devel