compileIt for revolution?

[Richard Gaskin]

Alex Tweedly wrote:

Alex, that's a valuable itemization. I've copied it below in its 
entirety because it's worth a second read.

Has it been logged as a request to BZ?  It would be great to see those 
addressed.

This seems like an opportunity here for someone who's worked 
successfully with the SDK to consider teaming up with others to make a 
nifty Rev-based IDE specifically for making Rev externals.  By taking 
care of all the tedious stuff, it could make crafting externals a lot 
more fun -- and you wouldn't have to leave you C environment for 
testing, since it'd all be under one roof. :)

Could this be done by generating make files and running GCC through 
shell(), or am I dreaming?

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com



>>> I am working on this project, but the *confusing* Externals SDK 
>>> doesn't help. 
>>
>> What aspects have you found confusing?
>>
> This is only a start ....
> 
> -  Doesn't say which compilers should work (tells me some that won't - 
> but doesn't say which ones will - and in particular, doesn't say which 
> free ones will :-)
> 
> (It kind of implies that many of them will, maybe even most of them - 
> but a short list of a few that are expected to work would eliminate that 
> as a possible explanation for troubles run into)
> 
> -  Includes a number of examples which are fragments of C code, without 
> any comments describing the interface being provided, and without 
> showing the corresponding Transcript
> 
> - Include samples like XSetArray which is a function using the 
> "built-in" SetArray - but its parameters are never explained, and still 
> something of a mystery.
> 
> - It doesn't include a "tiny, simple" example; I'd like to see a very 
> simple example - e.g. return the string "hello program" - in a separate 
> directory. Not doing OS specific "GetComputerName", not calling QT, not 
> .... just a very, very simple example. With a correspondingly simple Rev 
> stack, and step-by-step instructions (not as detailed as I sent to this 
> list, but some kind of "here's the first thing to do" instructions).
> - it intermingles things which are (apart from exceptional cases) 
> "fixed" with things which are your own, without distinguishing clearly - 
> e.g. "There are two header files you'll need to #include, XCmdGlue.h and 
> external.h. ..." But there is no "external.h" file included in the 
> distribution - it means the header file for your code, which will be 
> anything but "external.h"
> 
> In fact, the distribution includes article.c and article.h - what should 
> happen is that article.c should #include the article.h - but it doesn't, 
> it #includes external.h - which is non-existent, so you're guaranteed a 
> compile failure at step 1. Not likely to inspire confidence.
> 
> - it uses examples where the C functions are named with leading 
> underscores - when prepended underscores was described above as (one of 
> ) the reason(s)  why the Borland compiler won't work
> 
> - it includes extra functions that aren't referenced or used (as far as 
> I can tell). e.g. XGetVar and XGetArray are in convolve_and_life.c - but 
> I can't find anywhere they're used.
> 
>> I wonder if a Rev tool set up for writing C, generating the make file, 
>> and running GCC would address a lot of this with very little effort....