How to proceed with Makefile projects

[ghentschke]

As mentioned in today CDT monthly call, we have to discuss this topic. The CDT issue #1149 has shown that users missed the old template wizards. Especially the Makefile project wizard.
IMO there could be two sub topics here:
1. Confusion about the wizard names:
See #1149 (reply in thread)
2. Missing features in the Makefile project?
In the cdt issue #1149 (comment) the author is missing "C/C++ Build" entry in the project properties:

When choosing this setting, the configuration is broken : project properties do not have a "C/C++ build" entry

Unfortunately it's not clearly which project wizard the user has selected. I assume it's the Makefile Project:

These projects do not have a "C/C++ Build" option entry in the projects properties.

A not very clear workaround is to create a "Makefile Project" via one of the "C Managed Build" or "C++ Managed Build" selections:

...and to select the "Makefile project" on the next wizard page:

This project allows the user to create the make files automatically or not:

When assuming that the "Makefile Project" has been created via one of "C Managed Build" or "C++ Managed Build", it's not clear for me, if the user still misses features compared to a "Makefile Project" with an previous CDT release.
If not, then subtopic 2 is obsolete and we should "just" clarify/improve the wizard to create a new "Makefile Project". For example by filtering on the second wizard page when the User selects "Makefile Project" on the first page:

[ghentschke]

Please attend this discussion: @ewaterlander , @jld01, @jonahgraham

[ewaterlander]

About point 2, missing "C/C++ Build" entry

The Build entry in the project properties is missing on purpose. For Core Build Makefile and CMake projects the build the build settings are are in the "Build Settings" tab in the launch configuration.
See https://help.eclipse.org/latest/topic/org.eclipse.cdt.doc.user/getting_started/core_build_system.htm?cp=8_1_1_0

[jld01]

At present, Core Build Makefile projects allow the user to build in separate directories for Debug and Run:

• build/make.debug.win32.x86_64.Local
• build/make.run.win32.x86_64.Local

but it is not obvious how to vary the build in any way based on Debug/Run selection. I was able to add conditional build flags by testing the name of the current working directory in the makefile:

ifeq (run,$(findstring run,$(notdir $(CURDIR))))
	MYFLAGS=-O3
else
	MYFLAGS=-O0 -g3
endif

Is there an easier way?

By way of contrast, the Legacy Makefile projects allow the user to create any number of build configurations with arbitrary names and pass different flags to each build configuration on the GNU make command line:

[ewaterlander]

ifeq (run,$(findstring run,$(notdir $(CURDIR))))
	MYFLAGS=-O3
else
	MYFLAGS=-O0 -g3
endif

Is there an easier way?

Yes, there is an easier way. I forgot to document it. The launch mode sets the environment variable BUILD_MODE. There is an example in the Makefile if you create a new project with a helloworld example.

ifeq ($(BUILD_MODE),debug)
	CFLAGS += -g -O0
else ifeq ($(BUILD_MODE),run)
	CFLAGS += -O2
else ifeq ($(BUILD_MODE),profile)
	CFLAGS += -g -pg -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage
	LDFLAGS += -pg -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage
	EXTRA_CLEAN += makeproj.gcda makeproj.gcno $(PROJECT_ROOT)gmon.out
	EXTRA_CMDS = rm -rf makeproj.gcda
else
    $(error Build mode $(BUILD_MODE) not supported by this Makefile)
endif

I will create an issue and update the documentation.

[ewaterlander]

By way of contrast, the Legacy Makefile projects allow the user to create any number of build configurations with arbitrary names and pass different flags to each build configuration on the GNU make command line.

Like CMake projects, you can add custom arguments in the Build Settings tab in the launch configuration. These are unique for each launch configuration (run, debug, ...).

I think issue #1234 is related. Legacy Makefile projects have the option to add custom Make targets. This is disabled for Core Build Makefile projects. This may be handy for Core Build Makefile as well.

[jld01]

Got it! I didn't notice the "for Debug" part of the dialog title previously. So BUILD_MODE is a convenience variable in the sense that the user can define whatever additional variables they wish for each mode.

If the intention is to eventually eliminate the legacy makefile project type then, yes, the ability for the user to create additional build modes will be important for core build.

[ewaterlander]

It is confusing that "Makefile project" is used for both the Legacy Managed Build Makefile projects and Core Build Makefile projects.

I think "managed build system" and "core build system" does not mean much to end users. Perhaps it's better to leave that away and use simple names like "Legacy Makefile" and "New Makefile", or "Classic Makefile" and "New Makefile".
Perhaps "Classic" (old, but still popular) sounds a bit more friendly than "Legacy" (outdated, yet still in use).

These names must then consistently be used in the menus, wizards, and documentation.
The user manual needs a big refactoring.

When you click in the New C/C++ Project wizard on the left side on "Make" it should show on the right side all flavors of Makefile projects. Currently it only shows the new Makefile project.

[ewaterlander]

That's a good idea.

About the naming. I proposed "New Makefile", but perhaps it's better use a name like "Core Makefile". "New" is not new in the future.
For managed build "Classic Makefile" sounds best for me. "Legacy Makefile" is also acceptable, because this is already used in the current documentation.

[jld01]

+1 for "Classic" and "Core". Classic suggests the traditional way without undue negativity. Core suggests the principal/fundamental way. In the absence of any background knowledge, I think the new user would naturally choose "Core".

[ewaterlander]

@ghentschke and @jonahgraham , what do you think?

[ghentschke]

I like "Classic" and "Core" as well. Maybe we find a name which emphasizes the feature of the project a little bit more. I think it would be a good idea to give a little explanation in the selection wizard:

For "Core Makefile Project" it could be something like: "No build configurations. No Makefile generation. The user writes it manually. A "helloworld" example build file can be created for new projects. Each new project is created with a launch configuration tied to it. Build settings are presented in the launch configuration Build Settings tab."

[ewaterlander]

Yes, the 'Core' concept needs to be made clear. Note that CMake projects also fall under the 'Core' type projects.

For the Classic Makefile projects we still need to mention that they can be 'managed' or 'unmanaged', which basically means Makefile generation on or off. The latter is also referred to as the 'existing code' type.

I am preparing a demo which I want to show in the meeting.

[ewaterlander]

Hi,
I was going to post the screenshots I showed in the CDT monthly meeting on Oct 8. Sorry for the delay.
I renamed the labels I showed with "Unmanaged" to "Manual".
As remarked we should not introduce a new term "unmanaged" in the UI, although it is used in some forums and in CDT's source code.
"Manual" is better I think, because it is clear and self-explanatory.

First a screenshot of the C/C++ wizard. If you select "Make" on the left side you will see both Classic and Core Makefile projects.

Next a screenshot of the Classic Makefile C++ project wizard. The title is clear, and it is clear which projects are "manual".

Last screenshot of the import wizard. It makes clear you get a Manual Classic Makefile project. Not a Core Makefile project.

[jld01]

I renamed the labels I showed with "Unmanaged" to "Manual". As remarked we should not introduce a new term "unmanaged" in the UI, although it is used in some forums and in CDT's source code. "Manual" is better I think, because it is clear and self-explanatory.

Before the advent of Core build, the project wizard referred to the manually configured makefile project type simply as a "Makefile Project". So I think longstanding users will tend to interpret the word "makefile" as implying a manually configured makefile.

To ease the transition for longstanding users, my suggestion for the template names in the Make category would be to avoid the word "makefile" for users navigating to managed build as follows:

• Classic C Project
• Classic C++ Project
• Core Makefile Project

And I would be inclined to drop the word "Manual" wherever it occurs in the project types tree on the following wizard page. In this way we minimize change for longstanding users of classic makefile projects.

[ewaterlander]

I agree with this. Classic implies make.

In the Classic C/C++ wizard the last section would then get back its original text "Makefile Project". To the first sub bullet I would like to add "Existing code or", because it can be used for existing code also. And in the second sub bullet we remove "Makefile" (compared to the original):

• Makefile Project
  • Existing code or empty project
  • Hello world C++ project

There should be no confusion, because this is all in the wizard for Classic projects, and Core Makefile projects will have consistently the "Core" prefix.

In the import wizard we would get back the original text:

• Existing code as Makefile project

If you agree I make new screenshots.

[jld01]

@ewaterlander wrote:

In the import wizard we would get back the original text:

* Existing code as Makefile project

That now seems ambiguous, perhaps "Existing code as Classic Makefile project"?

I agree that "Existing code or empty project" makes sense.

[ewaterlander]

That now seems ambiguous, perhaps "Existing code as Classic Makefile project"?

Yes, that's better.

[ewaterlander]

New screenshots:

[ewaterlander]

Perhaps one thing we could change is a separate template category "Classic" in the New C/C++ Project wizard, instead of adding Classic and Core Makefile together in one category "Make". Currently classic projects are only visible in the "All" category.

[ewaterlander]

If there are no further comments I could upload a PR which changes the labels as in my last screen shots.

[jld01]

Perhaps one thing we could change is a separate template category "Classic" in the New C/C++ Project wizard, instead of adding Classic and Core Makefile together in one category "Make". Currently classic projects are only visible in the "All" category.

The screenshots look good to me, @ewaterlander. Thank you for your work on this. The template category names reflect the underlying build tool. This seems pleasantly consistent to me. I don't think we need a separate Classic category.