Home / Browse / CEDET / Mail / Archive

CEDET

Email Archive: cedet-semantic (read-only)

2001:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar	_Apr	_May	_Jun	_Jul	_Aug (1)	_Sep (6)	_Oct (5)	_Nov (2)	_Dec (44)
2002:	_Jan (15)	_Feb (15)	_Mar (6)	_Apr	_May (1)	_Jun (14)	_Jul (7)	_Aug (5)	_Sep (11)	_Oct	_Nov (11)	_Dec (18)
2003:	_Jan (36)	_Feb (21)	_Mar (36)	_Apr (17)	_May (48)	_Jun (8)	_Jul (6)	_Aug (10)	_Sep (14)	_Oct (12)	_Nov (43)	_Dec (61)
2004:	_Jan (40)	_Feb (69)	_Mar (44)	_Apr (57)	_May (48)	_Jun (36)	_Jul (45)	_Aug (29)	_Sep (11)	_Oct (28)	_Nov (19)	_Dec (23)
2005:	_Jan (55)	_Feb (37)	_Mar (24)	_Apr (17)	_May (10)	_Jun	_Jul (19)	_Aug (7)	_Sep (19)	_Oct (21)	_Nov (13)	_Dec (12)
2006:	_Jan (21)	_Feb (15)	_Mar (51)	_Apr (5)	_May (6)	_Jun (25)	_Jul (11)	_Aug (13)	_Sep (16)	_Oct (16)	_Nov (1)	_Dec (1)
2007:	_Jan	_Feb	_Mar (10)	_Apr (6)	_May (28)	_Jun (37)	_Jul (19)	_Aug (21)	_Sep (25)	_Oct (8)	_Nov (4)	_Dec (9)
2008:	_Jan (9)	_Feb (40)	_Mar (49)	_Apr (28)	_May (83)	_Jun (17)	_Jul (20)	_Aug (12)	_Sep (22)	_Oct (29)	_Nov (41)	_Dec (67)
2009:	_Jan (12)	_Feb (46)	_Mar (67)	_Apr (12)	_May (25)	_Jun (61)	_Jul (44)	_Aug (43)	_Sep (35)	_Oct (22)	_Nov (27)	_Dec (21)
2010:	_Jan (26)	_Feb (24)	_Mar (30)	_Apr (23)	_May (55)	_Jun (21)	_Jul (12)	_Aug (28)	_Sep (60)	_Oct (38)	_Nov (16)	_Dec (10)
2011:	_Jan (15)	_Feb (23)	_Mar (9)	_Apr (9)	_May	_Jun (21)	_Jul (32)	_Aug (45)	_Sep (38)	_Oct (28)	_Nov (14)	_Dec (4)
2012:	_Jan (8)	_Feb (22)	_Mar (17)	_Apr (13)	_May (7)	_Jun (21)	_Jul (18)	_Aug (7)	_Sep (46)	_Oct (94)	_Nov (17)	_Dec (12)
2013:	_Jan (33)	_Feb (30)	_Mar (62)	_Apr (64)	_May (15)	_Jun (3)	_Jul	_Aug	_Sep	_Oct	_Nov	_Dec


S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
		(6)	(2)		(1)
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
					(1)
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
(1)	(1)	(2)	(1)	(4)
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
		(1)	(1)		(4)	(1)
29	30
(1)

Re: [cedet-semantic] Possible completion problem

From: Eric M. Ludlam <eric@si...> - 2009-11-27 16:06

Hi Michael,

   I think the problem here is that when the internal typecache is 
created, it does not treat the declaration of Private the type as 
belonging to AAA the same way as it handles the case for classes in 
namespaces.  It does know a little about methods declared similarly, but 
methods don't need the implementation available since the prototype is 
usually sufficient.

   I don't see a quick fix for this at the moment.  I'll keep this on my 
list of things to work on.

Thanks
Eric

Michael Reiher wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Possibly I found a case that semantic can't interpret correctly. The problem 
> is when trying to complete members of "d" in AAA::aaa() in the example below. 
> Semantic doesn't seem to know any. When looking at the output of semantic-
> adebug-analyze it seems all sematic knows about "d" is that it's of type 
> "class Private*". It ignores however the definition of the class in the same 
> file.
> 
> Greets Michael
> 
> 
> ------ aaa.h ---------------------------------
> 
> class AAA
> {
> public:
>   AAA();
> 
>   void aaa();
> 
> private:
>     class Private;
>     Private * const d;
> };
> 
> ------ aaa.cpp ------------------------------
> 
> #include "aaa.h"
> #include "bbb.h"
> 
> class AAA::Private
> {
>     Private() : bbb(0) {
>     }    
>     
>     BBB* bbb;
> };
> 
> void AAA::aaa()
> {
>     d->_; // _ is position of cursor
> }
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
> Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> _______________________________________________
> cedet-semantic mailing list
> cedet-semantic@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic
>

Re: [cedet-semantic] Possible completion problem

From: Michael Reiher <redm@gm...> - 2009-11-27 17:16

Ok, I see. I wasn't sure, if there is really something not working or just 
something not uptodate. I forgot a "public:" in the AAA::Private declaration, 
btw. The result is the same, however.

Greets Michael

On Friday 27 November 2009 17:06:18 Eric M. Ludlam wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
>    I think the problem here is that when the internal typecache is
> created, it does not treat the declaration of Private the type as
> belonging to AAA the same way as it handles the case for classes in
> namespaces.  It does know a little about methods declared similarly, but
> methods don't need the implementation available since the prototype is
> usually sufficient.
> 
>    I don't see a quick fix for this at the moment.  I'll keep this on my
> list of things to work on.
> 
> Thanks
> Eric
> 
> Michael Reiher wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Possibly I found a case that semantic can't interpret correctly. The
> > problem is when trying to complete members of "d" in AAA::aaa() in the
> > example below. Semantic doesn't seem to know any. When looking at the
> > output of semantic- adebug-analyze it seems all sematic knows about "d"
> > is that it's of type "class Private*". It ignores however the definition
> > of the class in the same file.
> >
> > Greets Michael
> >
> >
> > ------ aaa.h ---------------------------------
> >
> > class AAA
> > {
> > public:
> >   AAA();
> >
> >   void aaa();
> >
> > private:
> >     class Private;
> >     Private * const d;
> > };
> >
> > ------ aaa.cpp ------------------------------
> >
> > #include "aaa.h"
> > #include "bbb.h"
> >
> > class AAA::Private
> > {
> >     Private() : bbb(0) {
> >     }
> >
> >     BBB* bbb;
> > };
> >
> > void AAA::aaa()
> > {
> >     d->_; // _ is position of cursor
> > }
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >----- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008
> > 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment -
> > and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's
> > new with Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> > _______________________________________________
> > cedet-semantic mailing list
> > cedet-semantic@...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008
>  30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment -
>  and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's
>  new with Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> _______________________________________________
> cedet-semantic mailing list
> cedet-semantic@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic
>

Re: [cedet-semantic] Possible completion problem

From: Eric M. Ludlam <eric@si...> - 2009-11-27 18:20

Yea, When looking for the type "private", Semantic is not yet looking 
for the particular pattern here.  It will take some time to dig in and 
solve it.

Eric

Michael Reiher wrote:
> Ok, I see. I wasn't sure, if there is really something not working or just 
> something not uptodate. I forgot a "public:" in the AAA::Private declaration, 
> btw. The result is the same, however.
> 
> Greets Michael
> 
> On Friday 27 November 2009 17:06:18 Eric M. Ludlam wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>>    I think the problem here is that when the internal typecache is
>> created, it does not treat the declaration of Private the type as
>> belonging to AAA the same way as it handles the case for classes in
>> namespaces.  It does know a little about methods declared similarly, but
>> methods don't need the implementation available since the prototype is
>> usually sufficient.
>>
>>    I don't see a quick fix for this at the moment.  I'll keep this on my
>> list of things to work on.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Eric
>>
>> Michael Reiher wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Possibly I found a case that semantic can't interpret correctly. The
>>> problem is when trying to complete members of "d" in AAA::aaa() in the
>>> example below. Semantic doesn't seem to know any. When looking at the
>>> output of semantic- adebug-analyze it seems all sematic knows about "d"
>>> is that it's of type "class Private*". It ignores however the definition
>>> of the class in the same file.
>>>
>>> Greets Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> ------ aaa.h ---------------------------------
>>>
>>> class AAA
>>> {
>>> public:
>>>   AAA();
>>>
>>>   void aaa();
>>>
>>> private:
>>>     class Private;
>>>     Private * const d;
>>> };
>>>
>>> ------ aaa.cpp ------------------------------
>>>
>>> #include "aaa.h"
>>> #include "bbb.h"
>>>
>>> class AAA::Private
>>> {
>>>     Private() : bbb(0) {
>>>     }
>>>
>>>     BBB* bbb;
>>> };
>>>
>>> void AAA::aaa()
>>> {
>>>     d->_; // _ is position of cursor
>>> }
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008
>>> 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment -
>>> and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's
>>> new with Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cedet-semantic mailing list
>>> cedet-semantic@...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008
>>  30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment -
>>  and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's
>>  new with Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
>> _______________________________________________
>> cedet-semantic mailing list
>> cedet-semantic@...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic
>>
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
> Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> _______________________________________________
> cedet-semantic mailing list
> cedet-semantic@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-semantic
>

Re: [cedet-semantic] [CEDET-devel] multiple conditions in #ifdef not parsed correctly

From: Eric M. Ludlam <eric@si...> - 2009-11-27 18:18

Hi,

Thanks for the patch.

You are right, this is a pretty big patch.

Your comments indicate that you borrowed a lot from hideif.  Since 
hideif is a part of Emacs, perhaps that code can be used directly?  If 
not, since CEDET is also becoming a part of Emacs, the shared pieces 
could be extracted.

If this level of complexity is really needed and there is not shared 
part with hideif, perhaps it is time to buckle down and write a real 
lexical pre-processor for Semantic.  Though I tend to think that every 
time I have to pile a new hack on top of the existing preprocessor.

As for your need of a release, I'm guessing from the comments that the 
code you wrote is relatively small vs what was borrowed from hideif?  I 
counted 13 lines, plus a few lines in the original lexical fcn you 
modified.  That might be ok, though if you enjoy hacking Emacs, it might 
be wise for you to provide them a release anyway.  That would let you 
implement changes in hideif as necessary.

Thanks
Eric

Brian J. Carlson wrote:
> "Brian J. Carlson" <gmane.briancarlson@...> [Thu, 19 November 2009 (14:32 EST)] wrote:
> 
>>>> I have recently started using CEDET with boost and have narrowed down a 
>>>> parsing "problem." 
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that #ifdef pre-parsing is not evaluating correctly. 
>>>>
>>>> An example of this type of statement is as follows:
>>>> #if defined(BOOST_NO_MEMBER_TEMPLATES) && !defined(BOOST_MSVC6_MEMBER_TEMPLATES)
>>>>
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>>    Your assessment is correct.  The preprocessor in CEDET for C doesn't 
>>> do much for complex expressions.  
> 
>>>    If you'd like to take a crack at this problem in 
>>> semantic-c-do-lex-if, I expect that the solution is to change the regex 
>>> in semantic-lex-c-if to exclude the expression, and to extract it 'by 
>>> hand' in semantic-c-do-lex-if where it could then be evaluated.  If you 
>>> don't have time, hopefully I can examine this more after Thanksgiving.
> 
> Eric, 
> 
> I did take a quick crack at this. I borrowed from hideif.el and do some
> parsing. It's not perfect (in that it doesn't evaluate C-Macros in an
> #if pre-processor directive among other things), but it does a very
> large number of the things I needed. It's extremely "hackish" and
> probably doesn't follow the paradigm (ooooooh BS Bingo word) you were
> thinking about.  
> 
> I'd be interested in working with this some more if you'd like. 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
>>>
>>>    If your patch is over 10 lines long or so, I'll also need a release 
>>> so your changes can be included in Emacs.
> 
> Ummm it is well over 10 lines, so if you decide to include my changes,
> let me know and I'll fill out the FSF (I'm assuming it's FSF since I
> noticed that CEDET is going into the next emacs YEAH!!!)  paperwork for
> your changes. 
> 
>> Of course I also noticed that the following is also not quite right, but this
>> is a result of my looking at the first problem and is not really that much of a
>> problem for me right now:
>>
>> #define A
>> #define B
>> #if defined(A)
>> void a();
>> #elif defined(B)
>> void b();
>> #else
>> void c();
>> #endif
> 
> My changes still doesn't address this, but this was a very tricky piece,
> to evaluate the first #if then know to skip over all the next
> #elif statement. (i.e. difficult to know whether the first #if was
> evaluated as true and the #elif at (point) was to be tested or not. 
> At least in the very short term.
> 
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> ;-Brian J. Carlson
> Leominster, MA
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
> Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cedet-devel mailing list
> Cedet-devel@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cedet-devel