[Geany-devel] Committed Project Build Commands to build-system branch

[Nick Treleaven]

On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:02:48 +1100
"Lex Trotman" <elextr at gmail.com> wrote:

> > No problem, it is more important that a project chooses and sticks
> > to a
> style than what the style actually is.  On the other hand formatting
> is the sort of rote activity that I believe computers should do, not
> people.  On that basis my work experience student now knows much more
> than she ever wanted to about C code formatters.  We have found one,
> 'uncrustify' that seems to do what we want without doing too much
> extra, I have committed a version of build.c run through it for you
> to have a look at.  uncrustify is very flexible (about 250-300
> options) and it seems to be able to enforce all the requirements of
> HACKING. The only extra things that I can't stop it doing are:
> - positioning the alignment of variable definitions and parameters
> slightly different to the originals (still aligns and hangs * though)
> - aligning function call continuations with the open parens, I think
> it is ok, see what you think.  It can cause the call to need more
> wrapping though.
> 
> The wrapping of long lines is a little simplistic for long function
> calls that are already manually wrapped, needs a bit of a helping
> hand but not very often.

Thanks, but I don't like the existing code being reformatted with
different alignment really. What are the options you used?

...
> > > NOTE: this brings up one significant change needed for the full
> > > version, the can compile, can build, flags of the filetype will no
> > > longer be used since the existance (or not) of such a command is
> > > what determines if a menu item is shown.  Otherwise users would
> > > not be
> >
> > I agree, I wanted to remove them before.
> >
> > > able to add filetype commands to unused filetype menu items.  So
> > > in the full version, a commandwhich is not set will mean use the
> > > default whilst one set to nothing (item name) will mean don't
> > > use. Have to allow 'command set to nothing' just in case someone
> > > wants to use the make custom dialog to type the whole command,
> > > possibly useful for occasionally used commands whilst still
> > > capturing and parsing the command output.
> > >
> > > But are there any other important uses of these flags besides
> > > controlling what is shown in the build menu?
> >
> > If so, they can be replaced with if (NZV(ft_command_str)) checks (or
> > maybe just checks against null for the custom command).
> >
> 
> Ok, i'll take that as removal is ok

Yes.

Regards,
Nick