RFR 8209064: Make intellij support more robust after changes for 2018.2
Erik Joelsson
erik.joelsson at oracle.com
Tue Aug 28 16:20:31 UTC 2018
Looks ok to me.
/Erik
On 2018-08-27 07:07, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
> As I was about to push this, I realize there was a minor nit with the
> way in which build.xml files found some classes inside the generated
> .idea folder - that is, the path to this folder was defined in a
> relative way from the location of the script file.
>
> A more robust way to get there is to setup an idea.dir ant variable
> which is dynamically populated by the IDE with the known location of
> the project IML file.
>
> The only files touched were the two project build.xml files, as well
> as the idea ant.xml files.
>
> Webrev:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8209064_v2
>
> Maurizio
>
>
> On 23/08/18 14:21, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 21/08/18 10:31, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>> Hi Maurizio!
>>>
>>> Even if this only incidentally relates to the build, please always
>>> include build-dev when making changes in the "make" directory.
>> I will - thanks
>>>
>>> As far as I can understand, your changes looks good. One question:
>>> the build.xml was previously stored as a "template", and copied to
>>> the output directory. Now it's left in the source tree. I assume
>>> that there was no actual transformations or changes made to the
>>> template before? So that the scripts do not modify the source tree
>>> version, that is.
>> You are correct - the script is not meant to be modified; customized
>> properties are injected by the runtime environment - such properties
>> are defined in the ant.xml file and that is indeed a template file
>> (so it can be customized).
>>
>> Thanks
>> Maurizio
>>>
>>> /Magnus
>>>
>>> On 2018-08-07 13:21, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> last week I submitted an 'emergency' patch to fix intellij project
>>>> support after 2018.2 changes. The goal of these changes was to move
>>>> the build.xml ant file out of the .idea folder, as the IDE no
>>>> longer supported DOM indexing in such folders (as a result of
>>>> https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-189915). As a workaround,
>>>> I tweaked the scripts to copy build.xml in the build folder.
>>>>
>>>> Thinking more about this issue, there's a more robust fix possible,
>>>> which doesn't involve moving files to the build folder (which could
>>>> be potentially unreliable, depending on how people build the JDK).
>>>> In fact, the best solution is to leave build.xml where it is, and
>>>> fix the remaining configuration files to point at it. This allows
>>>> to revert all changes in the scripts that set up the project
>>>> configuration (bin/idea.sh for JDK, and make/langtools/build.xml
>>>> for langtools).
>>>>
>>>> For the langtools project a bit more changes were necessary, given
>>>> that in langtools we did not have a 'template' folder - and all
>>>> intellij files were dumped onto the same path. So I had to move the
>>>> configuration langtools files (all but build.xml) under a new
>>>> template folder (located under make/langtools/intellij/make) and
>>>> place build.xml outside it. Then tweak the build.xml script to work
>>>> off this new template folder. These are all small conceptual
>>>> changes, but the impact on the webrev is quite biggie (because of
>>>> file renaming etc.).
>>>>
>>>> I also took the chance to fix some issues with the JDK project ANT
>>>> configuration (see changes in make/idea/template/workspace.xml), as
>>>> the last changes did not update the location of the ant file used
>>>> here - as a result no ant target entries were showing up under the
>>>> Build menu.
>>>>
>>>> Webrev here:
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8209064/
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Maurizio
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
More information about the compiler-dev
mailing list