Code::Blocks

User forums => General (but related to Code::Blocks) => Topic started by: Anonymous on May 31, 2005, 06:23:11 pm

Title: C::B design - Multiple compilers / programming languages
Post by: Anonymous on May 31, 2005, 06:23:11 pm
This may seem a bold question, but why wasn't Code::Blocks designed in a way that any user may parametrize Editor syntax highlighting and compiler settings through some specific format configuration XML files?

It would be foolish to actually ask for such a demolishing change at this time, but it seems not only possible, but also more reasonable to me than to have to recode/recompile certain fundamental plugins such as the compiler / code completion ones whenever a new compiler is to be supported. And it can be even more complicated if one considers adding support for additional programming languages, such as D, as someone already suggested...

So my question, which comes out of curiosity, is: why making it depend only on plugins to work?
Title: C::B design - Multiple compilers / programming languages
Post by: rickg22 on May 31, 2005, 06:34:05 pm
I think the syntax highlighting for other languages couldn't be implemented because of some bug (can't remember which one).

About compiler expansion, the current architecture doesn't support it. But it's planned for v2.0.

Regarding class browser and code completion, the plugin we have has the syntax hardcoded  and somewhat difficult to change. If someone wants to make an alternative plugin which allows for language expansion, we'd be really grateful :)
Title: Re: C::B design - Multiple compilers / programming languages
Post by: zieQ on August 31, 2005, 11:06:20 am
It's in discussion in the compiler and debugger plugin section, and as Rick said, it's planned for V2
Title: Re: C::B design - Multiple compilers / programming languages
Post by: cherokee on September 02, 2005, 10:53:24 am
good topic.
I think, C::B is a good product. we programers should learn more ablut it, not only to use it. so, I holp that we'll disscus it's design more and more.   If C::B's father can help us to understand the design of it, this is a great thing.
Can C::B be describe in a UML diagram?