Re: make gbuildtojson and make xx-ide-integration problems.

On 12/15/2016 02:58 PM, Markus Mohrhard wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen
> <bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com
> <mailto:bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 01:02:05PM +0100, Jan Iversen wrote:
>     > since you have already made the ball rolling by making gbuildtojson in C++
>     > the logical consequence would be to port the script to C++.
>
>     My fear with that was it (using C++ instead of Python) would
>     discourage people
>     to contribute for other IDEs. But now that we have at least a wireframe
>     implementation for most popular IDEs going straight to C++ might
>     indeed be our
>     best option[1] bootstrapping-wise. Although parsing JSON in C++ is
>     rather ....
>     meh, but we certainly dont want an external dependency for that.
>
>     Probably needs an iterative approach: first parse the JSON stuff in
>     some C++
>     objects and create output for the first IDE. Other IDEs move over
>     from Python
>     to C++ one by one later.
>
>
>
> I'm not really sure if switching to C++ will really help us long term.
> It might solve the python3 problem on OSX short term but would make
> hacking the IDE generator quite painful. Actually at least I don't see
> huge problem with letting the script depend on the python that we use
> for the build, whether internal or external, and therefore just build
> the python on OSX when we run the script. At least for the case that we
> pre-generate IDE solutions (which is what I read to make it apparently
> possible for really everyone to open a LibreOffice source file) I think
> it would not be an issue. 

i'm rather unconvinced of yet another c++ rewrite so here's my patch to
use the internal python3 on macOS:

https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/32047/