|
Boost : |
From: Jeff Trull (edaskel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-07-17 18:48:58
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:11 AM Jeff Garland <azswdude_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Maybe we could encourage the author to bring it to us as a 'tool' -- I
> don't know that we need a review for that even. Regardless, I wasn't aware
> of these -- cool!
>
>>
>>
What concerns me about this approach is that the pretty-printers will
quickly drift out of sync with the libraries themselves. In fact it has
already happened - if you look at Rüdiger's repo you can see he had to
incorporate a versioning scheme, as well as unit tests, to ensure the code
stayed correct (one of the features I really like about his work). Some
method where individual libraries produced visualizers that were combined
at install time would be ideal, as they would be owned by each maintainer.
I think a good starting point would simply be to say "if you want to supply
pretty-printers, please put them in XX directory in your library and use
the following conventions". The work of producing a single resource for all
of Boost could wait until a few libraries had started maintaining these.
Off the top of my head, how about lib/XXX/debug/gdb/pp, where pp becomes
the Python module, analogous to what on my system is
/usr/share/gcc-10/python/libstdcxx/v6/,
the top level libstdc++ pretty-printer? Similar work could be done, if
desired, for VSCode and lldb, in parallel directories.
Best,
Jeff T.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk