I have a product that I'm working on, Foo. It has currently roughly the following filesystem structure. It's composed of several logically-distinct modules. I want to package each of those modules so that I can make dependencies a bit more explicit.
I'd also like to continue being able to do a single checkout, though, and have my single solution, single build-script, etc available to me.
Something like how rspec does it; the rspec package depends on a set of sub-packages that can be individually maintained.
Edit: How best to:
make the modules inter-dependent
make the work-on-many-things-at-once-from-source-control-checkout experience work, in the sense of not duplicating things like build-automation, etc. I want to keep having a single solution so that ReSharper can find unused code throughout (this is a big legacy codebase), for example.
** So changes to a set of modules would require that I increment all of their versions at once, to correctly advance the dependencies.
.
/Foo.git
/module1
/src
/module1
/module1.specs (tests)
/module1.sln
/module1.wrapdesc
/version
/module2
/src
/module2
/module2.specs
/module2.sln
/module2.wrapdesc
/version
/Foo.sln
/Rakefile.rb (I'm using ruby/rake to build)
/Gemfile
/Gemfile.lock
Related
This question is about the project command and, by extension, what the concept of a project means in cmake. I genuinely don't understand what a project is, and how it differs from a target (which I do understand, I think).
I had a look at the cmake documentation for the project command, and it says that the project command does this:
Set a name, version, and enable languages for the entire project.
It should go without saying that using the word project to define project is less than helpful.
Nowhere on the page does it seem to explain what a project actually is (it goes through some of the things the command does, but doesn't say whether that list is exclusive or not). The cmake.org examples take us through a basic build setup, and while it uses the project keyword it also doesn't explain what it does or means, at least not as far as I can tell.
What is a project? And what does the project command do?
A project logically groups a number of targets (that is, libraries, executables and custom build steps) into a self-contained collection that can be built on its own.
In practice that means, if you have a project command in a CMakeLists.txt, you should be able to run CMake from that file and the generator should produce something that is buildable. In most codebases, you will only have a single project per build.
Note however that you may nest multiple projects. A top-level project may include a subdirectory which is in turn another self-contained project. In this case, the project command introduces additional scoping for certain values. For example, the PROJECT_BINARY_DIR variable will always point to the root binary directory of the current project. Compare this with CMAKE_BINARY_DIR, which always points to the binary directory of the top-level project. Also note that certain generators may generate additional files for projects. For example, the Visual Studio generators will create a .sln solution file for each subproject.
Use sub-projects if your codebase is very complex and you need users to be able to build certain components in isolation. This gives you a very powerful mechanism for structuring the build system. Due to the increased coding and maintenance overhead required to make the several sub-projects truly self-contained, I would advise to only go down that road if you have a real use case for it. Splitting the codebase into different targets should always be the preferred mechanism for structuring the build, while sub-projects should be reserved for those rare cases where you really need to make a subset of targets self-contained.
Moving to intellij i'm trying to understand properly the logic behind the its project structure. I come from eclipse. After reading for a while i understood the relation between workspace and project, then between project and modules. However something that is puzzling me is the logic of the default project configuration in Intellij. Indeed, when you create a project there is an initial module which to a certain extend is equivalent to the Project itself. To be more precise, the initial module folder is the Project folder. This is kind of confusing to me. Then when you add more module they are sub-module of that module.
My first question is what is the rationale of making this first module equivalent to the project folder ?
Following this, i would further ask, what the point of having modules as sub-module of others.
In eclipse i use to have simply different project (i.e. module) independent from each other and adding the dependency as necessary. So how does the Idea solution makes it better, if not what is the rational here ?
I saw that one can start an empty project and then add modules to it. However in that case, the modules added are added as subfolder of the Project and therefore there is no initial module equivalent to the Project folder ? So why this difference and what is the rationale behind it ?
What would be the better approach, the first or second ?
Would it be ok to have this first initial module with no src or test folder but just with the proper facet so as to spread it to the sub-module?
I would appreciate if someone could explain a bit the rational of all of it ?
I will move to SBT soon (i.e. maven structure which I suppose inspired all modern IDE project Structure) if one want to explain within that context fine, nevertheless i want to understand the rationale in intelliJ first.
Many thanks,
-M-
PS: What i'm looking for is some advise for some multi-module project structure in Intellij as i'm moving my eclipse workspaces to it.
I think that it's not uncommon for projects to be relatively small, so they don't need fancy modules with dependency management etc. In that case, I find the default project created by IntelliJ to fit perfectly my needs: no need to add submodules, everything is directly in the parent project, it reduces the structure to its bare minimum.
On the other hand, big projects with submodules will likely resemble the structure of a Maven multimodule project (perhaps SBT too, but I don't know this tool at all). You have a parent root which acts as a container for submodules. The parent project may also store configuration (a default SDK, a language level etc. that will be inherited by the submodules). The actual code will be contained in the submodules.
Regarding your questions, it all depends on the kind of project you are developing. For a small codebase, you could keep a simple project with no submodule. For bigger codebases, you can either create modules manually, or import an existing Maven/SBT/whatever project, which will automatically create modules reflecting the imported structure.
I would like to add into project some files that shouldn't be compiled. I mean mainly text files with for example notes, concepts, comments etc.
I realized that it is possible only at module level. But it is not very convenient. I'd rather prefer to keep them on project level. Is it possible in any way?
And if not:
I have another idea: to create special module, name it for example "other_stuff", do not create src directory and put files there. Is it ok? I'm afraid of potential compilation problems when one of modules is artificial, with no sources but still has sdk assigned (it is probably impossible to leave module without sdk assigned).
While generating artifacts you can add any file into your artifact. Also, in modules you can have folders not declared as source, and they will not be compiled.
I'm learning/vetting CMake at the moment as I'm thinking of migrating our code to it. One thing we do a lot of with our current make system is to "subproject" common code files. For example, we have a lot of shared, generic headers (plus some c/cpp files) which get included in every project we create. I want to replicate this in CMake but I don't see an easy way of doing it. To be precise, I want to do something like:
Parent CMakeLists.txt
add_subdirectory(shared_folder shared_build_folder)
#Next line should somehow add in the files reference in the shared_folder
add_executable([specific files for this project] build_folder)
Child CMakeLists.txt (shared_folder)
#Somehow have a list of files here that get added to the parent project
So far I've found various "ways" of doing this, but all seem a little hacky. I'm coming to the conclusion that this is in fact the way I have to do things and CMake isn't really geared towards this style of development. For clarity, most of my solutions involve doing something like creating a variable at the parent level which consists of a list of files. This variable (via some shenanigans) can get "passed" to/from any children, filled in and then when I call add_exectuable I use that variable to add the files.
All my solutions involve quite a few macros/functions and seemingly quite a bit of overhead. Is this something other people have tried? Any clues on the best approach for doing this?
Thanks
Andrew
We were facing the exact same problem and after some time of crying we accepted the CMake-way and it resulted in a better structured project even if it meant to change some parts of our structure.
When using sub-directories the targets are automatically exported throughout the whole project (even in subsequent other add_subdirectory-calls) once the add_subdirectory-statement was processed: sub-projects which contain common code are creating libraries.
There is also the PARENT_SCOPE which you can use to export variables to parent CMakeLists.txt
For "other" things we simulated the FindPackage-mechanism by including .cmake-files into the main CMakeLists.txt with include. In doing so we can provide variables easily, change the include_directories and do other fancy things global to the project.
As there are no dependencies between cmake-variables, we don't use cmake to configure the source (features of the project), but only the build (compiler, includes, libraries...). This split was the key element of our build-system-refactoring.
Not having come from a C/compiled languages background, I'm finding it hard to get to grips with using Go's packages mechanism to create modular code.
In Python, to import a module and get access to it's functions and whatnot, it's a simple case of
import foo
where foo.py is the name of the module you want to import in the same directory. Otherwise you can add an empty __init__.py into a subfolder and access the modules via
from subfolder import foo
You can then access functions by simply referencing them through the module name, e.g. y = foo.bar(y). This makes it easy to separate logical pieces of code from one another.
In Go however, you specify the package name in the source file itself, e.g.
package foo
at the top of the 'foo' module, which you can then supposedly import through
import (
"foo"
)
and then refer to it through that, i.e. y := foo.Bar(x) . But what I can't wrap my head around is how this works in practice. The relevant docs on golang.org seem terse, and directed to people with more (any) experience using makefiles and compilers.
Can someone please clearly explain how you are meant to modularise your code in Go, the right project structure to do so, and how the compilation process works?
Wiki answer, please feel free to add/edit.
Modularization
Multiple files in the same package
This is just what it sounds like. A bunch of files in the same directory that all start with the same package <name> directive means that they are treated as one big set of code by Go. You can transparently call functions in a.go from b.go. This is mostly for the benefit of code organization.
A fictional example would be a "blog" package might be laid out with blog.go (the main file), entry.go, and server.go. It's up to you. While you could write a blog package in one big file, that tends to affect readability.
Multiple packages
The standard library is done this way. Basically you create modules and optionally install them into $GOROOT. Any program you write can import "<name>" and then call <name>.someFunction()
In practice any standalone or shared components should be compiled into packages. Back to the blog package above, If you wanted to add a news feed, you could refactor server.go into a package. Then both blog.go and news.go would both import "server".
Compilation
I currently use gomake with Makefiles. The Go installation comes with some great include files for make that simplify the creation of a package or a command. It's not hard and the best way to get up to speed with these is to just look at sample makefiles from open source projects and read "How to Write Go Code".
In addition to the package organisation, Like pip in python, use dep https://github.com/golang/dep for go package management. if you use it on existing go package it will automatically build the dependency tree with versions for all the packages being used. when shifting to production server, dep ensure will use Gopkg.toml to install all the required packages.
Just use dep ensure -add , other commands for dep are:
Commands:
init Set up a new Go project, or migrate an existing one
status Report the status of the project's dependencies
ensure Ensure a dependency is safely vendored in the project
version Show the dep version information
check Check if imports, Gopkg.toml, and Gopkg.lock are in sync
Examples:
dep init set up a new project
dep ensure install the project's dependencies
dep ensure -update update the locked versions of all dependencies
dep ensure -add github.com/pkg/errors add a dependency to the project