Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow user to configure locations of generated directories #8

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

petervdonovan
Copy link
Contributor

@petervdonovan petervdonovan commented Mar 1, 2024

This RFC competes with #7. It is much more complex than #7 and has a wider scope. It is incompatible with #7 and would subsume #7 if it is merged.

The reasons for opening this RFC now are that:

  • A serious UX problem (lf-lang/lingua-franca#2203) was recently reported, and it is preferable that we address it soon.
  • The obvious solutions to this problem generally involve breaking changes, so it is desirable to solve it earlier rather than later.
  • Solutions to this problem have the potential to affect the location of generated executables, which certainly will affect the correctness of the VS Code extension. More generally, changes in the locations of generated files can affect the extension depending on features that we may implement, such as interaction with third-party language servers. We strongly prefer for the VS Code extension to work properly because its behavior affects how our project is perceived by users; therefore, the desired behavior should be nailed down with minimal ambiguity.

For these reasons it is desirable for comments on this RFC to be received before the end of next week on Friday March 8 as a soft deadline. This tentative deadline can be adjusted based on feedback.

Rendered


Currently, `lfc` will silently delete directories that have the same name as generated directories without any warning to the user. For example, if the user is already maintaining a directory called `include` that contains source files, then the current behavior will cause that directory to be overwritten or even deleted, which in the worst case can result in lost work.

Furthermore, the only way to address such a directory naming conflict is for the user to change the names of the directories that they maintains.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Furthermore, the only way to address such a directory naming conflict is for the user to change the names of the directories that they maintains.
Furthermore, the only way to address such a directory naming conflict is for the user to change the names of the directories that they maintain.

@petervdonovan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Upon further reflection it isn't clear to me that it makes sense right now to fix a deadline to merge this soon. I've updated the description of this PR to reflect this fact, essentially placing this RFC on a backlog.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants