Re: [Swig-devel] Scilab integration into master

[William S F. <ws...@fu...>]

Hi Simon

This sound better, the test-suite run time improvement is rather dramatic.
A few questions still:

1) Why is builder.sce the default given all its problems?

2) Why have builder.sce at all? It clearly doesn't work very well and as
I've said before, SWIG is not a build tool generator and I don't see why
SWIG should support some quirky build system.

3) Why are the contents of gw_<module>.c file generated separately to the
contents of <module>_wrap.c instead of generating just one file?

4) I haven't seen any doc updates as mentioned below. These need to be in
place, but I suggest we finish the discussion on the need for builder first.

William

On 22 October 2014 14:05, Simon Marchetto <
sim...@sc...> wrote:

>  Hello William,
>
> Now SWIG Scilab supports standard build. The SWIG test-suite and examples
> now build like all other languages.
> The Scilab build system is still also supported, and used by default.
>
> In detail:
>
> - by default, SWIG generates the builder.sce script, that you have to run
> from Scilab to build the module.
> Nothing changed, except I could simplify the builder.sce code since it is
> no more used in the context of SWIG testing.
>
> - with the -nobuilder option, SWIG generates two files:
>        - the gateway (module) entry point gw_<module>.c, mandatory, which
> is used to link the functions declared in Scilab to the function C
> implementations.
>        - the loader.sce script, which is used later to load the module
> (link dynamically the module with Scilab).
> The SWIG test-suite and examples use now this option, then build the
> wrapper and the gateway entry point, and link to the shared libray, all
> these with the configured compiler.
>
> I've prefixed all SWIG Scilab command line options related to builder.sce
> mode (-addcflags -> -buildercflags), so that the user knows these options
> concern this mode only.
>
> The test-suite execution time on Travis has been reduced drastically with
> the change, from about 15mn to 3mn.
> The difference comes probably from the fact Scilab build system uses
> libtool.
>
> I'm updating now the documentation.
>
> Simon
>
>
> Le 17/09/2014 22:54, William S Fulton a écrit :
>
>   I'm sorry if it wasn't clear enough that the build should use the
> successful approaches utilised elsewhere. SWIG has long tried not to be too
> builder generator as this is a specialised area which numerous other tools
> attempt to solve. The reasons for this should be clearer now, I trust.
>
>  Probably you have fixed all the bugs now, like -o. What I'd like to see
> next is the Example/Makefile.in operating like the other languages... just
> a nice simple and clear invocation of the C/C++ compiler after running
> SWIG. Modifying the makefiles really shouldn't be hard, as you'd base it on
> what is already in the other languages, you hardly need to think about that
> too much. I don't quite follow what you mean by having to break the C++
> module code, is this some sort of initialisation?
>
>  Fixing typos etc can be done in a later release... better to get the
> fundamentals right first. At least everything else looks to be in good
> shape.
>
>  William
>
> On 17 September 2014 09:00, Simon Marchetto <
> sim...@sc...> wrote:
>
>>  William,
>>
>> I will fix the build system.
>>
>> I am just a bit sad because it should have been done before, as it is an
>> important change and has several impacts.
>> I thought about changing it long time ago, but my focus was on
>> functionalities like typemaps, and other things, and I was not used at SWIG
>> as I am now, it was a little risky.
>> Now it means that I have to break all the C++ module code and makefiles,
>> on which I have spent many time to get it fixed.
>> And documentation will also have several changes too, and these last days
>> I was fixing typos....
>>
>> But let's move on, it will be a good thing anyway.
>>
>> Which bugs are you talking about ? I think I ve fixed the -o bug. Are
>> there another issues that do not concern the build ?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> Le 16/09/2014 20:54, William S Fulton a écrit :
>>
>> Simon, you've addressed everything now except the build complexity and
>> bugs, thanks. I'd be happy to merge it but for the quirky build system.
>> Users need to get started easily and currently it seems to be user
>> unfriendly. As we know that this fundamental component needs fixing, I'd
>> rather fix it before release.
>>
>> One important problem that I can see is the use of full paths in the
>> build, eg I see this in the generated code:
>>
>> cflags = cflags + "
>> -I/home/william/swig/github/dabble/Examples/scilab/class";
>>
>> This is not portable. For all these reasons, I'd like you to fix all this
>> before Scilab is merged into master. I hope that you can find the time and
>> that it won't actually take too much effort. Perhaps you could let us know
>> when you think it will be realistically ready for release planning.
>>
>> William
>>
>>