🚀 go-pugleaf

Jesper Hogstrom (Borland) wrote:
> I agree. There is an option to completely eliminate the reading of 
> config files in dcc32:
> 
> --no-config = do not load default DCC32.CFG file
> 
> Personally, I prefer to define all configuration options/option sets in 
> make to ensure I know exactly what I get. Developers may mess up the 
> configs in the bdsproj file, and all of a sudden you're releasing 
> products with the wrong switches set.
> 
> This is easy enough to do once and for all, using either 
> target-conditional macros or relying on defines passed to the make file. 
> Then just add those switches to your $(DCC32) macro.
> 
True. Unfortunately this doesn't solve the problem. You still need to 
manage consistency between the makefile and *.bdsproj files. Otherwise 
developers could debug one code and automated build system could produce 
completely different one. Putting everything into makefile only is also 
kind of step backward ;). IMHO the right solution would be to unify 
configuration files for IDE and command line tools. Then one could use 
*.bdsproj and *.bdsgroup files directly from the makefile.

> 
> ....
> 
> I think that would be a very good idea. QC is there for that very 
> reason. Support for bdsproj => make would be a neat addition too.
> 
I am not very familiar with the QC structure. Would you suggest a right 
place in there to place such a request?

Regards,
Mikhail