[ale] [OT] Any Eclipse and C users on the list

[Michael Potter]

JD,

This wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makedepend
seems to indicate that gcc -MM is preferred over makedepend.

I am keen on using eclipse friendly technology and as of the most
recent build of Eclipse automake is baked in.  Automake uses the gcc
-MM option.

I am completely new to automake.

Anyone on the list an automake expert?  Especially with Eclipse experience?

-- 
Michael Potter

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:31 PM, JD <jdp at algoloma.com> wrote:
> I've been using a C/C++ makefile that handled dependencies automatically for
> about 20 yrs. It uses gmake and something called makedepend(s), if memory
> serves. I haven't coded in some time, but it worked across 10+ different
> platforms for commercial software that the company. We even switched the
> MSVC project files to gmake to better control those builds.
>
> I'll look for it and email you privately.
>
> Michael Potter <michael at potter.name> wrote:
>>
>> After a couple of hours googling around to see how others are using
>> CMake and automatic dependency checking, I am beginning to think that
>> CMake is not the solution to my problem.
>>
>> I don't want to maintain the dependencies by hand, and I don't want to
>> continue to use my kludgy bash script for extracting the dependencies.
>>
>> Here is what I am currently investigating:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Dependency-Tracking.html#Dependency-Tracking
>>
>> Automake does dependency tracking as it is compiling so I have hope
>> that my generated code will not be a problem.   That is in contrast
>> with dependency tracking that happens at the start of a compile;
>> because the generated code does not exist at th
>>  e start
>> of a compile,
>> the dependencies cannot be determined.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Ryan Curtin <ryan at igglybob.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 10:26:21AM -0500, Michael Potter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Here is my question that I cannot find documented in CMake...
>>>>
>>>> Is there a way to generate the dependencies from the source?
>>>>
>>>> Specifically, if I have source that looks like this:
>>>>
>>>> in dilbert.c:
>>>> #include "src/alice.h"
>>>> #include "src/wally.h"
>>>>
>>>> Right now I have a hand coded bash script that generates
>>>> obj/dilbert.o: src/dilbert.c src/alice.h src/wally.h
>>>> cc -o $@ src/dilbert.c
>>>>
>>>> That way all I need to do is maintain the source and the tedious part
>>>> of maintaining
>>>>   the
>>>> makefile is done for me.   The bash script is
>>>> sophisticated enough to handle recursion and ignoring some includes.
>>>> As slick as it is, I want to get of this system and move to main
>>>> stream scheme.
>>>>
>>>> How does cmake eliminate that part of the makefile creation?
>>>
>>>
>>> In general CMake does not do this.  You can set it up in different ways,
>>> but the way I generally set up a project is to put either a
>>> CMakeFiles.txt in each directory, or one CMakeFiles.txt somewhere, and a
>>> command like
>>>
>>> add_executable(the_program
>>> src/alice.h
>>> src/alice.c
>>> src/wally.h
>>> src/wally.c
>>> src/dilbert.c
>>> ...
>>> )
>>>
>>> but this does mean that every file you make in the project, you have to
>>> add it to the list of compiled files.
>>>
>>> I think that what you want to do is say something like
>>> "add_executable(the_program main.c)" and then CMake looks through all
>>> the #includes of main.c (recursively) to ge
>>>  nerate
>>> a list of files to be
>>> compiled.
>>>
>>> That is a complex problem and while it can be solved with CMake it would
>>> be... somewhat backhanded.  You could write a script which would look
>>> through each file in a list for #include lines using regexes, and then
>>> somehow pruned that list to only those #includes which were relevant
>>> (i.e. filter out #include <stdio.h> and similar).  Then you could call
>>> that script again recursively with the new list.
>>>
>>> There are a few gotchas in that idea, but it sounds like you already
>>> have this system basically implemented in bash.  Converting it to a
>>> CMake script is within the realm of possibility, if that's what you want
>>> to do.  I've not seen a CMake project that does this, but if it works
>>> and it's well-documented and maintainable, I don't see any problems with
>>> it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ryan Curtin       | "Think!  What to do!"
>>> ryan at igglybob.com |   - The Master
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> Ale
>>> mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Sent from a Linux system.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>



-- 
Michael Potter
  Tapp Solutions, LLC
  Replatform Technologies, LLC
+1 770 815 6142  ** Atlanta ** michael at potter.name  **
www.linkedin.com/in/michaelpotter