[inspect] Tag a directory to be ignored?
The Boost inspection tool that generates the inspection reports has a hardwired list of directories not to recurse into. "CVS", ".svn", ".git", etc. While those particular cases make sense, some of the hardwired names are so specialized ("doc/xml", "tools/build/v2/engine", etc.) that a better approach might be to tag directories as not to be inspected. That way the inspect.cpp code wouldn't have to be changed to accommodate yet another directory to be avoided. One simple way to do this would be for inspect.cpp to ignore any directories with some special file. For example, "no_boost_inspect". Comments? --Beman
At Sun, 2 Jan 2011 19:58:50 -0500, Beman Dawes wrote:
The Boost inspection tool that generates the inspection reports has a hardwired list of directories not to recurse into. "CVS", ".svn", ".git", etc. While those particular cases make sense, some of the hardwired names are so specialized ("doc/xml", "tools/build/v2/engine", etc.) that a better approach might be to tag directories as not to be inspected. That way the inspect.cpp code wouldn't have to be changed to accommodate yet another directory to be avoided.
One simple way to do this would be for inspect.cpp to ignore any directories with some special file. For example, "no_boost_inspect".
Comments?
Seems like there's a lot of overlap between the files that shouldn't be checked into revision control and the files that shouldn't be checked by inspect. Do we already have such a description for SVN? -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
Seems like there's a lot of overlap between the files that shouldn't be checked into revision control and the files that shouldn't be checked by inspect.
Interesting point. Perhaps someone familiar with Doxygen could comment?
Do we already have such a description for SVN?
Not AFAIK. --Beman
At Sun, 2 Jan 2011 21:12:33 -0500, Beman Dawes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
Seems like there's a lot of overlap between the files that shouldn't be checked into revision control and the files that shouldn't be checked by inspect.
Interesting point. Perhaps someone familiar with Doxygen could comment?
How is doxygen related here? -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On 1/2/2011 9:00 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
At Sun, 2 Jan 2011 19:58:50 -0500, Beman Dawes wrote:
The Boost inspection tool that generates the inspection reports has a hardwired list of directories not to recurse into. "CVS", ".svn", ".git", etc. While those particular cases make sense, some of the hardwired names are so specialized ("doc/xml", "tools/build/v2/engine", etc.) that a better approach might be to tag directories as not to be inspected. That way the inspect.cpp code wouldn't have to be changed to accommodate yet another directory to be avoided.
One simple way to do this would be for inspect.cpp to ignore any directories with some special file. For example, "no_boost_inspect".
Comments?
Makes sense to me.
Seems like there's a lot of overlap between the files that shouldn't be checked into revision control and the files that shouldn't be checked by inspect.
What makes you say that? It is the case for neither "doc/xml" nor "tools/build/v2/engine". -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Eric Niebler <eric@boostpro.com> wrote:
Seems like there's a lot of overlap between the files that shouldn't be checked into revision control and the files that shouldn't be checked by inspect.
What makes you say that? It is the case for neither "doc/xml" nor "tools/build/v2/engine".
Oh, just generalizing prematurely without looking at the specifics of our case :-) Sorry for the noise, -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
participants (3)
-
Beman Dawes -
Dave Abrahams -
Eric Niebler