[forge-dev] Support for the Gradle build system as a plugin for Forge

Wed May 15 10:44:26 EDT 2013

Yep, it's a hog :/

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 6:17 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse at redhat.com>wrote:

> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 02:38:21PM -0400, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> >Do you have a suggestion for an alternate Groovy parser to use if we
> cannot
> >use groovy eclipse?
>
> Nope - its one of the reasons I consider Gradle as evil as Ant in many
> places :)
>
> >Also, even if we do, this should not  (unless the Eclipse JDT does some
> >*really bad* things), be a problem because it will be loaded in an
> isolated
> >classloader.
>
> Just please consider memory usage - these are not exactly "small" on
> memory usage.
>
> /max
>
> >
> >
> >On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen
> ><manderse at redhat.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Just a warning about using groovy eclipse plugin - it historically have
> >> had a dependency
> >> on a patched Eclipse JDT meaning it's not installable on just any
> eclipse
> >> version.
> >>
> >> I would hope if you just need a groovy parser that you don't have a
> >> depenency on Eclipse JDT for that
> >> - but if you do then that might become tricky (might also be osgi
> >> dependencies to deal with, but
> >> that is another concern ;)
> >>
> >> If the dependency will be included into eclipse as a forge loaded lib we
> >> might avoid it all - but
> >> since forge itself also have a dependency on JDT it is something to keep
> >> an eye on for possible
> >> version mismatches.
> >>
> >> /max
> >>
> >> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 06:00:20PM +0200, Adam Wyłuda wrote:
> >> >Hi Lincoln!
> >> >Thank you for your response, it's nice to hear that my proposal is
> rated
> >> >positively.
> >> >
> >> >I first thought that creating our own Groovy parser which works
> directly
> >> on
> >> >Groovy AST would be a good idea because that would give us more
> >> >possibilities than existing solutions, but you are right - there is a
> risk
> >> >that it might take more time than planned (although basic support
> could be
> >> >provided which could be sufficient to work on Gradle project files).
> >> >
> >> >I have found this paper which gave me some insights on problems
> related to
> >> >Groovy script parsing and modification:
> >> >http://groovy.ifs.hsr.ch/groovy-refactoring.pdf
> >> >
> >> >It seems that the biggest issue is how to rewrite code without changing
> >> its
> >> >formatting and how to keep comments in code. Groovy AST doesn't contain
> >> >comment nodes so if we want to use pure Groovy AST to parse it, we
> need to
> >> >include all whitespace and comments in our model, what is possible
> because
> >> >Groovy AST nodes include position in source information, so we could
> just
> >> >substring our source between statements, but it's hard because we need
> to
> >> >check thoroughly every expression as comments can appear between any
> >> nodes,
> >> >like this:
> >> >x = y + /* comment */ z
> >> >
> >> >So as you said, it's better to use existing solution so we won't
> reinvent
> >> >the wheel. I think that Groovy Eclipse plugin is the best candidate
> >> because
> >> >it's API is similar to JDT plugin used in JavaParser (actually Groovy
> >> >plugin uses JDT and it even seems to be a part of JDT), so it will be
> more
> >> >convenient for other developers with JavaParser experience to maintain
> it.
> >> >The are also alternatives like NetBeans or IntelliJ IDEA plugin, but I
> >> >think Eclipse plugin is sufficient enough to work effectively with
> Groovy
> >> >sources.
> >> >
> >> >Like you suggested I updated my proposal to give myself some time to
> >> >understand Groovy Eclipse plugin API and start working on Gradle
> project
> >> >support earlier.
> >> >
> >> >2013/5/7 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter at gmail.com>
> >> >
> >> >> Hey Adam,
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you so much for your proposal! We have reviewed your submission
> >> and
> >> >> so far all the mentors have given it a high rating :)
> >> >>
> >> >> I took a look at your prototype groovy-manager project, which looks
> very
> >> >> interesting. You are doing source parsing for groovy, which is pretty
> >> >> challenging.
> >> >>
> >> >> While writing a parser from scratch can be a thrilling challenge, I
> have
> >> >> to say that it can be quite a burden! We started writing our own
> >> >> Java-parser for Forge, but quickly came to find that even parsing a
> >> >> type-safe language is incredibly difficult.
> >> >>
> >> >> We ended up using the Eclipse JDT as a base implementation for our
> >> >> JavaParser.
> >> >>
> >> >> Have you looked for any Groovy parsers that may already exist today?
> >> This
> >> >> would give you a quick boost when working on this project. It may be
> the
> >> >> case that the parser would require some usability improvements to
> make
> >> >> integration with Forge simpler, and simpler for plugin devs, but I
> >> think it
> >> >> is safe to say that a search for existing parsers is warranted.
> >> >>
> >> >> If a suitable parser can be found, I would suggest that we revise
> your
> >> >> proposal to allow for several weeks to become familiar with that
> parser,
> >> >> and then allocate the rest of the time to actually working with it to
> >> >> implement the gradle support.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd suggest starting here, with the Groovy Eclipse Plugin - they
> almost
> >> >> certainly already support groovy syntax:
> >> >> http://groovy.codehaus.org/Eclipse+Plugin#EclipsePlugin-KeyFeatures
> >> >>
> >> >> The problem with writing your own parser is that you have to
> maintain it
> >> >> :) Better to delegate.
> >> >>
> >> >> ~Lincoln
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Adam Wyłuda <adamwyl92 at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hello JBoss community,
> >> >>> This year I want to participate in an OS project and GSoC gives me
> >> great
> >> >>> opportunity to do so.
> >> >>> Here is my idea as GSoC 2013 proposal:
> >> >>>
> >>
> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2013/adamw/1
> >> >>> I'd be very happy to hear your opinions (I hope it's not too late).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> forge-dev mailing list
> >> >>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Lincoln Baxter, III
> >> >> http://ocpsoft.org
> >> >> "Simpler is better."
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> forge-dev mailing list
> >> >> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >>
> >>
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >forge-dev mailing list
> >> >forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> forge-dev mailing list
> >> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Lincoln Baxter, III
> >http://ocpsoft.org
> >"Simpler is better."
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >forge-dev mailing list
> >forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>

-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20130515/51a98761/attachment.html 