Menu
▾
▴
cpptool-develop — CppRefactory Developer Mailing List
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(33) |
Nov
(51) |
Dec
(134) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 |
Jan
(18) |
Feb
(11) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(55) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(4) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(6) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(11) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(3) |
Jul
|
Aug
(27) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-20 08:56:33
|
I'm tackling that one. Promise to be interresting.
Baptiste.
|
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-20 08:54:03
|
It's done. ASTNode now have two new methods: getBlankedText() and
getOriginalText(). I removed the convenience method on SourceASTNode.
I also added include/rfta/parser/ASTNodeForward.h which contains forward
declaration for ASTNode related type and smart pointers (including
SourceASTNode).
Node should now be created in parser using Parser::createASTNode()
instead of ASTNode::create(). Since they have the same parameters, it was
only a matter of a search'n'replace.
Baptiste.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:57 PM
Subject: [Cpptool-develop] Task assigned: Add getBlankedContent?() and
getOriginalContent?() methods to ASTNode
> Since I'm done with VC 6 add-in (at least enough to get it working),
I'm
> tackling the following task.
>
> [High] Add getBlankedContent?() and getOriginalContent?() methods to
ASTNode
> How:
> add a SourceASTNode? parameter to ASTNode constructor.
> add a createASTNode() method to Parser, which retrieve the SourceASTNode?
> from the context_.
> have all parser use the new createASTNode() method instead of calling
> ASTNode::create().
> Comments: see
>
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=1364546&forum_id=1271
> 0
> Status: in progress BaptisteLepilleur?
>
>
> Baptiste.
|
|
From: Sven R. <rei...@ma...> - 2002-12-20 03:48:33
|
On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote: > At the current time, there is an obstacle to using a hierarchy for > ASTNode.It is the node mutation which change the type of the node. > > Baptiste. That's why I mentioned a State pattern. Sven. -- Sven Reichard Dept. of Math. Sci. University of Delaware rei...@ma... |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 23:20:29
|
At the current time, there is an obstacle to using a hierarchy for ASTNode.It is the node mutation which change the type of the node. Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sven Reichard" <rei...@ma...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 12:11 AM Subject: Re: [Cpptool-develop] ASTNodeTypeFeatures and ASTNodePropertyFeatures... > I'm not very happy with this neither. Actually, I've been thinking about > how the whole ASTNode hierarchy can be improved (with all the properties, > it's not very "abstract" anymore). I'm not sure yet whether inheritance > (in form of a State/Strategy) can help us here. > > I'll keep thinking about this over the holidays. > > Sven. > > -- > Sven Reichard > Dept. of Math. Sci. > University of Delaware > rei...@ma... |
|
From: Sven R. <rei...@ma...> - 2002-12-19 23:12:00
|
I'm not very happy with this neither. Actually, I've been thinking about how the whole ASTNode hierarchy can be improved (with all the properties, it's not very "abstract" anymore). I'm not sure yet whether inheritance (in form of a State/Strategy) can help us here. I'll keep thinking about this over the holidays. Sven. -- Sven Reichard Dept. of Math. Sci. University of Delaware rei...@ma... |
|
From: Sven R. <rei...@ma...> - 2002-12-19 23:08:00
|
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote: > Thanks Sven, this should make us a bit more reactive (and allow for holidays > ;-) ). > > Baptiste. That was the idea :) Actually, I'm taking some time off, sort of. In other words, I will not be very active from now through Jan 4. I will still check my email occasionally. Happy holidays to everybody! Sven. -- Sven Reichard Dept. of Math. Sci. University of Delaware rei...@ma... |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 22:55:59
|
I'm not really happy with the ASTNodeTypeFeatures and
ASTNodePropertyFeatures features. They seems to only be used to 'optimize'
the visit (mayHave...). In practice, this means that each time we add a
visitor for a specific kind of entity, some features are added to speed up
the visit. This sound plain wrong to me (you have to change most of the
ASTNodeTypes construction to do that).
Also, doing it that way make it difficult to see what is being visited
as you have to search through all the node types for some specific features.
I'm thinking of removing feature support for ASTNodeType and
ASTNodeProperty (or a least remove its usage for driving visitation).
ASTNodePropertyFeatures is in fact unused. An alternative to drive the node
visitation would probably be to declare what really need to be visited in
the visitor, much like what has been done in the IdentifierResolver.
What do you think ?
Baptiste.
|
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 22:52:08
|
Since I'm done with VC 6 add-in (at least enough to get it working), I'm tackling the following task. [High] Add getBlankedContent?() and getOriginalContent?() methods to ASTNode How: add a SourceASTNode? parameter to ASTNode constructor. add a createASTNode() method to Parser, which retrieve the SourceASTNode? from the context_. have all parser use the new createASTNode() method instead of calling ASTNode::create(). Comments: see http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=1364546&forum_id=1271 0 Status: in progress BaptisteLepilleur? Baptiste. |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 22:43:33
|
Thanks Sven, this should make us a bit more reactive (and allow for holidays ;-) ). Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sven Reichard" <rei...@ma...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 10:43 PM Subject: [Cpptool-develop] member changes > Folks, > > I added Andre to the developers. While I was at it, I gave Baptiste Admin > status. > > Sven. > > -- > Sven Reichard > Dept. of Math. Sci. > University of Delaware > rei...@ma... > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Geek Gift Procrastinating? > Get the perfect geek gift now! Before the Holidays pass you by. > T H I N K G E E K . C O M http://www.thinkgeek.com/sf/ > _______________________________________________ > Cpptool-develop mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpptool-develop > > |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 22:34:12
|
Great works Andrea. I guess finding that bug must have been educative. I have stumbled uppon it a few time myself. With this, support for the RenameLocaleVariable refactoring is getting real good!!! To deal with the for scope variability, we should indeed make it configurable. Though, it should be project dependent, not compiler dependent (you can compile a given project on multiple compiler/platform). According to the page below (which explains the issue very well), on VC7 the standard conformant behavior can be activated. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/vclang/html/_pluslang_The_C.2b2b_.fo r_Statement.asp?frame=true Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Baresel" <and...@gm...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:09 PM Subject: [Cpptool-develop] Parsing the for-iteration-expression works, all tests successful ! > I have just found the bug which causes the failing of the "testForScope" > working with my parser extensions. > > It was a wrong property of the 'forIterationExpression' > > const ASTNodeType STNodeTypes::forIterationExpression( "for-iteration-expression", > hasScope | > mayHaveVariableDeclProperties | > mayHaveLocalScopeIdentifierChildren | > mayHaveScopeGeneratorProperties ); > > where > "mayHaveLocalScopeIdentifierChildren" is really "mayHaveLocalScopeIdentifierProperties" > > since all elements of the forIterationExpressions are Properties. > > to see this bug optimistical - it helped me to get into the way how identier resolving is > done ;-) > > btw) is there any idea how to solve this problem of VC6 ? since the vc6 does not open an extra scope > for the "for-statement" and keeps it simply like a declaration within the scope of the for-statement. > e.g. > int i; > for (int i; .... > --> will lead to a compiler error "redefinition of 'i'", whereas this works in "stdc++" > > Should we add some configuration settings, so that for this case the scope creation will depend > on compiler settings ? > > Ok, I'm ready to check in my changes, > message me if i can. > > -- André |
|
From: Sven R. <rei...@ma...> - 2002-12-19 21:44:01
|
Folks, I added Andre to the developers. While I was at it, I gave Baptiste Admin status. Sven. -- Sven Reichard Dept. of Math. Sci. University of Delaware rei...@ma... |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 21:09:23
|
I'm done fixing that bug which I found while playing with VC++ add-in
(nothing as good as real code for testing ;-) ).
Baptiste.
|
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-19 20:42:28
|
I guess you are refering to src/RftaWorking.WWTpl, right ? You need workspace whiz add-in, which can be found at: http://workspacewhiz.com/ I'm currently using version 2.15 beta 1, which I found to be very stable. Though, I haven't tested the recent 3.0 release... Once installed, you need to add the template file. This is done by clicking on the pencil icon (insert code template) and clicking the file list button. Once added, just click the 'refactoring assistant new class' code template of the first dialog. An IE form will appears to input the class name, namespace... Notes that you can also specify that the class is a cppunit test. Click finish and the generated file will automatically be added to the active project. My hope is that the AST rewriter will allow us to write such class generator in much cleaner way (workspace whiz templates are fairly difficult to maintain). Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Baresel" <and...@gm...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:13 PM Subject: [Cpptool-develop] How does this template work for MS-Visual C++ ? > I don't know how to integrate this template for class creation, > it was a little but hard to write the my-class-files equally to your > framework baptiste, > how can I integrate this template ? > > thnx, until later, > -- André > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Geek Gift Procrastinating? > Get the perfect geek gift now! Before the Holidays pass you by. > T H I N K G E E K . C O M http://www.thinkgeek.com/sf/ > _______________________________________________ > Cpptool-develop mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpptool-develop > > |
|
From: Andre B. <and...@gm...> - 2002-12-19 20:31:30
|
I have just found the bug which causes the failing of the "testForScope"
working with my parser extensions.
It was a wrong property of the 'forIterationExpression'
const ASTNodeType ASTNodeTypes::forIterationExpression( "for-iteration-expression",
hasScope |
mayHaveVariableDeclProperties |
mayHaveLocalScopeIdentifierChildren |
mayHaveScopeGeneratorProperties );
where
"mayHaveLocalScopeIdentifierChildren" is really "mayHaveLocalScopeIdentifierProperties"
since all elements of the forIterationExpressions are Properties.
to see this bug optimistical - it helped me to get into the way how identier resolving is
done ;-)
btw) is there any idea how to solve this problem of VC6 ? since the vc6 does not open an extra scope
for the "for-statement" and keeps it simply like a declaration within the scope of the for-statement.
e.g.
int i;
for (int i; ....
--> will lead to a compiler error "redefinition of 'i'", whereas this works in "stdc++"
Should we add some configuration settings, so that for this case the scope creation will depend
on compiler settings ?
Ok, I'm ready to check in my changes,
message me if i can.
-- André
|
|
From: Andre B. <and...@gm...> - 2002-12-19 20:15:58
|
I don't know how to integrate this template for class creation, it was a little but hard to write the my-class-files equally to your framework baptiste, how can I integrate this template ? thnx, until later, -- André |
|
From: B. <and...@gm...> - 2002-12-19 14:24:18
|
I'm just working on the last problem with variable scope test which I think will be solved this day. To commit the code changes I need the developer access, Sven please try, or may be I have to send the code changes to you and you can check in. However this is worse since I want to check through all changes I made during the last days, to make sure that all of them really belong to the to-do-item. -- Andre -- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Andre Baresel mailto: and...@gm... ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen! |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-18 23:03:51
|
I added the add-in for VC++ 6. It lives in src/rftavc6addin.
It only did a little testing, so be careful. Though, it seems to be
working fine.
Install instruction:
- compile the add-in project in release configuration
- exit VC++
- run bin/install-vc6-addin.bat, which should copy the necessary dll in
the VC++ add-in directory (if your environment variable are configured
correctly)
- run VC++ and activate the add-in in Tools/Customize...
You will see a new ugly toolbar (anyone got an idea for icons ?). If you
want to bind the command to the keyboard, search for a command starting with
'RftaRenameLocaleVariable' in the add-in category.
Have fun,
Baptiste.
|
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-18 22:18:39
|
I modified the interface so that the refactoring is done in two steps:
- on construction, check selection and source validity and collect datas
to prepare the refactoring (locale variable node and occurrences)
- on apply, just make the necessary transformation with the specified
parameter.
Splitting the refactoring this away allow us to provide some information
in the user interface (e.g. old locale variable name).
Baptiste.
|
|
From: B. <and...@gm...> - 2002-12-18 11:55:25
|
> If you are using VC6, it's fairly simple: put a breakpoint in your test > and > run in debug mode. > > The important settings are in the project settings debug tab: > exe for debug session: > ..\..\deplib\cppunit\lib\DllPlugInTesterd_dll.exe > > Program arguments: > -c -b ..\..\build\rftaparser\Debug\rftaparser_mdd.ext > > Those are stored in the .opt files (a binary file). You should already > have > it. Thx, I got it working for rfta ... good ! --Andre -- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Andre Baresel mailto: and...@gm... Friedlander Str.124 Tel: +49 30 27593 123 D-12489 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 30 27593 125 ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen! |
|
From: B. <and...@gm...> - 2002-12-18 08:27:27
|
> You'll will find comment in those tests. Taking them out should fix the > failure. Yup, I found this after writing the mail ;-) > Though, concerning "IdentifierResolverTest::testForScope", you > will > also need to update IdentifierResolver::visitForIterationDeclaration() to > ensure the 3 properties (declaration, condition, next step) are visited in Thanx, this helps ... I wrote some tests for the ForStatementParser and what do you expect - yes I found and fixed some bugs in my implementation. I'm now quite happy with the CPPUnit stuff :-) -- Andre -- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Andre Baresel mailto: and...@gm... Friedlander Str.124 Tel: +49 30 27593 123 D-12489 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 30 27593 125 ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen! |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-18 08:07:45
|
You'll will find comment in those tests. Taking them out should fix the failure. Though, concerning "IdentifierResolverTest::testForScope", you will also need to update IdentifierResolver::visitForIterationDeclaration() to ensure the 3 properties (declaration, condition, next step) are visited in the correct order. Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Baresel" <and...@gm...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:34 PM Subject: [Cpptool-develop] Parsing of for-condition ... > the things are now compilable. However no parser tests are written, and the > "IdentifierResolverTest::testForScope" > "IdentifierVisitorTest::testForIdentifiers" > do fail. > > -- Andre |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-18 07:15:31
|
If you are using VC6, it's fairly simple: put a breakpoint in your test and run in debug mode. The important settings are in the project settings debug tab: exe for debug session: ..\..\deplib\cppunit\lib\DllPlugInTesterd_dll.exe Program arguments: -c -b ..\..\build\rftaparser\Debug\rftaparser_mdd.ext Those are stored in the .opt files (a binary file). You should already have it. Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Baresel" <and...@gm...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:38 PM Subject: [Cpptool-develop] Question on testsuite ... > Is there any possibilty to debug a test ? > And how this can be done ? > > -- Andre > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: > With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility > Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel > http://hpc.devchannel.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Cpptool-develop mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpptool-develop > > |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-18 07:11:07
|
It is. It represents the 'variable declaration' level of detail. A declarationOrExpression get mutated in a declarationExpression if it is recognized as such, or a unparsedExpressionStatement otherwise. Baptiste. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andre Baresel" <and...@gm...> To: "CppTool Mailing List" <Cpp...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:20 PM Subject: [Cpptool-develop] Question about "DeclarationOrExpression"-Nodetype > I'm just wondering if the "declarationOrExpression" nodetype is some > kind of an "unparsedExpressionOrDeclaration" > isn't it ? > > -- Andre > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: > With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility > Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel > http://hpc.devchannel.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Cpptool-develop mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpptool-develop > > |
|
From: Sven R. <rei...@ma...> - 2002-12-17 17:36:29
|
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Andre Baresel wrote: > Is there any possibilty to debug a test ? > And how this can be done ? I'm not sure I understand the question. If you are referring to the unit tests: These tests are used to ensure that our code is relatively bug-free. As such, they should be so simple that they don't introduce new bugs (we don't want to introduce meta-tests...). The CppUnit library is sufficiently tested, although it crashes for me under certain circumstances. A unit test is just a method in a class, so you can use any debugger to inspect it. IMO, a better way would be to introduce enough CppUnit assertions to show you exactly what goes wrong. Hope this helps Sven -- Sven Reichard Dept. of Math. Sci. University of Delaware rei...@ma... |
|
From: Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...> - 2002-12-17 16:59:11
|
Quoting Andre Baresel <and...@gm...>: > I'm currently implementing that item "adding parsing for 'for'-statement > > condition declaration" and didn't > find it to complicated however I have a general question about the > parsing. > > Should we directly call the parser for the for-iteration-expression > within the for-statment-parser or > does this lazy parsing continue also in here. For a lazy parsing of > for-iteration-expressions I would > add a 'unparsedForIterationExpression' node and write the mutator for > this. > > Within the for-iteration-expression-parser I would do the same - adding > > unparsed elements for the three properties > ( unparsedDeclarationOrExpression , unparsedExpressionStatement, > unparsedExpressionStatement ) > Well "unparsedDeclarationOrExpression" doesn't exist at the moment... > > For checking the code I'm currently using direct parsing. But it will be > no problem to > transform this, since the code only needs to be move than into the > mutator. Weither you use lazy parsing or not is related to two issues: 1) Fault tolerance 2) Level of detail (lazy parsing) The first one is easy to understand, what you don't parse will not cause failure. For the second one (still ill defined), lazy parsing is used to parse up to a given level of details. At the current time, there is roughly three levels: - statement - variable declaration - use of identifier in expression The statement parser is a parser at the 'statement level' and should therefore only do direct parsing for the same level. The first expression of the for statement should use lazy parsing (unparsedDeclarationOrExpression). For the other, you can directly create the expression (no check is done on what is an expression). It seems reasonnable for me that the for statement parser break the iteration declaration into its three sub-expressions. > > Implementation will still need some time since I also want to go through > the tests ... Take your time, but do commit once you have a version is somewhat working. It allow other to start working with the new feature (for example, modification the IdentifierResolver to handle for statement declaration). Baptiste. > -- Andre --- Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html Language: English, French |
