|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||2015-05-28 01:56 CEST|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0005549||OCaml||OCamlbuild (the tool)||public||2012-03-20 11:21||2014-01-21 11:54|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0005549: add tags for all build-related ocamlbuild command-line options|
|Description||It would be nice if ocamlbuild tags where "complete" with respect to the command-line option. For example we can call "ocamlbuild -cflag -foo ..." but there is no general tag "cflag(-foo)" -- the "usual suspects" annot, rectypes et al. are relatively well covered by independent tags, but you never know.|
Basically, all the -<foo>flag(s) options could be parametrized tags, and the -ocamlc and cousins as well. Other could be included on a case-by-case basis (-just-plugin doesn't make sense, but, say, -no-links could).
|Additional Information||Again, this feature was suggested by the confrontation with frontend tools that do not allow to pass ocamlbuild command-line options. Beside, it would help uniformity: I'd rather just write cflag(-rectypes) than remember (or look in `ocamlbuild -documentation`) which specific tag enables -rectypes.|
|Tags||No tags attached.|
I discussed this with xclerc and mark it acknowledged.
Again, patches from the community are welcome.
I agree, but one thought - shall we start adding growing number of command line options, or use the -tags? I'd avoid that.
Of course option interface could be generated, and maybe that's a good thing to do.
The problem I was complaining about in this bug report is not that we don't have enough command-line options, rather than it's hard to map some of them into tags (so it is about *tags* that are missing, not new options to add).
If I previously invoked ocamlbuild with some command-line options, and then I decide to instead write a _tag file, it should be easy to express everything I was doing as tags instead of options. So if I used "-clfags -g", I shouldn't have to look in the documentation to find "debug", just write something obvious like cflags(-g). Of course, that doesn't mean that we should remove "debug" or "-tags debug".
edited on: 2013-03-17 19:45
Yes, but my point is that we could keep in sync in a sane way. The way it's implemented is that there is no correlation between them, I proposed in this PR http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=5951 [^] solution to implement options using tags (which is essentially the same as you worked out here earlier)
|2012-03-20 11:21||gasche||New Issue|
|2012-03-20 11:22||gasche||Note Added: 0007113|
|2012-03-20 11:22||gasche||Status||new => acknowledged|
|2013-03-17 18:57||meyer||Note Added: 0008984|
|2013-03-17 19:02||gasche||Note Added: 0008985|
|2013-03-17 19:10||meyer||Note Added: 0008986|
|2013-03-17 19:10||meyer||Note Edited: 0008986||View Revisions|
|2013-03-17 19:11||meyer||Note Edited: 0008986||View Revisions|
|2013-03-17 19:17||meyer||Note Edited: 0008986||View Revisions|
|2013-03-17 19:45||meyer||Note Edited: 0008986||View Revisions|
|2013-03-18 03:38||meyer||Relationship added||related to 0005951|
|2013-03-18 03:38||meyer||Assigned To||=> meyer|
|2013-03-18 03:38||meyer||Status||acknowledged => assigned|
|2013-07-28 18:59||gasche||Relationship added||related to 0006099|
|2014-01-21 11:54||doligez||Assigned To||meyer =>|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2011 MantisBT Group|