Re: GCC-XML for XCode?
Re: GCC-XML for XCode?
- Subject: Re: GCC-XML for XCode?
- From: Cem Karan <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:39:12 -0400
rdar://4151165
Does this mean that you guys would be interested in doing something
like this? :-))
Thanks,
Cem Karan
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:47:03 -0700
From: Scott Tooker <email@hidden>
Subject: Re: GCC-XML for XCode? (was: RE: is there an automated way to
beautify code in xcode?)
To: xCode User List <email@hidden>
Message-ID: <email@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Filing an enhancement request and/or sending e-mail to xcode-
email@hidden is always the first best step.
Scott
On Jun 16, 2005, at 6:39 AM, Karan, Cem (Civ, ARL/CISD) wrote:
And the problem for this is that indent and all similar tools
require updated lex/yacc files so that they can have some level of
understanding of the files they operate on. So, Apple guys, is
there anyway that we can convince you to expose something like GCC-
XML in XCode's eventual plugin architecture? (see http://
www.gccxml.org/HTML/Index.html). I was thinking that it could be
built on Core Data, which would make writing plugins that operate
on the code directly much easier.
The reason I'm thinking along these lines is because of the number
of neat tricks you could do in your code, IF you had simple access
to the semantics. Indent is only one thing; think about searches.
You could specify that you don't want to search in comments, do
want to search only where a particular macro is defined, and only
within function definitions for all items that are of type integer,
and whose name is foo. Or you could put together a use-def chain
following plugin that will find only the particular variable,
rather than all instances of say 'i' (you defined 'i' in this
function, the use-def follower will only show where the definition
of 'i' reaches to). You could add meta-data to symbols, but hide
them in your editor (think about headerdoc or doxygen comments, but
where you don't have to see them unless you want to). You could
make code analysis tools much more easily than we do now.
I'm sure there are other neat things that you could do with it as
well (generate symbol call diagrams? Rapidly figure out what code
is portable to i386? Develop new optimization algorithms that
aren't currently available?) but I leave that to people that are
smarter than me.
Thanks,
Cem Karan
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden