Author Topic: Relative path handling controversy  (Read 3686 times)

Offline rickg22

  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
Relative path handling controversy
« on: June 06, 2005, 07:44:29 pm »
From http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=707416&aid=1214946&group_id=126998

Quote

 When the project root directory is added as a
compiler/linker/resource compiler path, and it is added
as a relative path, it shows up like this: "../<project
dir>", where <project dir> is the last part of the path
of the project root dir. While this _is_ a correct
relative path, and so doesn't actually break anything,
I think it would be better to add it as ".", which is a
shorter relative path to the same directory ;)


What should be the answer to this problem? The bug request has become quite controversial, since some users support it, and others don't.

WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO? :?

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Relative path handling controversy
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2005, 08:24:06 pm »
Well, I don't think it's much of a controversy yet: so far there's only one user supporting it, and one that doesn't. Haven't heard from anyone else but me and "Lajos Molnar (orfanik)" yet. I'm the one who posted it, so ofcourse I'm in favor of some kind of change.

But how about a middle road? Currently the only way to add a directory is by clicking a tree view of the filesystem, but how about allowing users to type in the directory in a textbox? That way, I can type in '.', and Lajos can type in "../project" if he wants to.

Though I'm still not sure what he means by this comment left at sourceforge:
Quote from: Lajos Molnar (orfanik)
I have sources paralell to my projectdir and this sources call headers from my projectdir. (we should NOT using "common" include dirs, all programmers use the own dirs - it's internal rights)


What I get from this is that he has a filesystem layout like this:
Code: [Select]
some_root
|-+- project
| +- headers
+-- sources

where:
  • "projects/" is the directory his Code::Blocks file is located,
  • he wants to include headers from "project/headers/" into files in "sources/",
  • "sources/" is shared with other programmers but "project/" isn't.
  • [/list:u]I still don't see what the problem would be with this setup if the "project/" dir is referred to as "." instead of "../project" when calling gcc etc. with "project/" as the working directory: it'll find the headers included as "headers/some_header.h" just fine with either option, and shouldn't make a difference for anything else either.

Offline Urxae

  • Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
Relative path handling controversy
« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2005, 08:30:47 pm »
Damn it, got logged out. that was me. (This happened to me at sourceforge today, too. Having a bad day?)

Anonymous

  • Guest
Relative path handling controversy
« Reply #3 on: June 07, 2005, 08:10:32 am »
"Currently the only way to add a directory is by clicking a tree view of the filesystem, but how about allowing users to type in the directory in a textbox? That way, I can type in '.', and Lajos can type in "../project" if he wants to"

It's ok to me.

I working in a very large corporation, i can't change the directory settings.

Offline Lexx

  • Multiple posting newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • http://www.glassfish-games.com
Relative path handling controversy
« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2005, 08:13:29 am »
Sorry, i forgat log in... , Lexx = orfanik (in sourceforge)