I've always wondered if there is a difference if you build a PLC project in the Debug or Release configuration. I don't think there is since the .compileinfo file in the _CompileInfo folder is the same size and it has the same filename (some hash I guess). Also when I log in after building with the other configuration, I do not get the prompt if I want to log in with online changes.
Does anyone know if the build configuration has an influence on the compiled code?
Short answer:
No, there is no change to the built code.
Long Answer:
The Build Configuration Tools that are referred to are primarily designed for implementation with general text based languages, rather than the TwinCAT layer that Beckhoff has stacked on top of Visual Studio.
Under standard languages there are a lot of properties that can be managed at the project level, and these properties are what are being modified when you change from debug to release configuration.
Twincat projects however are made up of two separate projects (proj_a.tsproj, proj_a.plcproj), and Visual Studio only recognizes one of these as a project file that can be modified, the .tsproj.
So if you want to see what properties will be modified by swapping between debug and release, have a look at what properties are available from the .tsproj file.
If you want to test this yourself you can disable a project file (proj_a.tsproj) and swap between debug/release to see the disabled status change as a result of swapping between the two build configurations.
I want to start using CLion at work instead of Eclipse (Eclipse needs 4h+ to index my project and use 9GB RAM).
As I mentioned in the title the project is very large and has two subprojects. So what I have done was put all projects in the same folder and done an "Import project from source". The CMakeLists.txt is made automatically by CLion and has a size of 44MB.
Now my problem is that CLion does not find any definition of anything in the project. (Need to mention that the project use a private toolchain).
Can anyone help me set the CLion environment?
Seems that you need at least one standard toolchain to extract the compiler options from CMake project. It can be a fake target, but it need to exist for right source parsing procedure.
I am a Visual Studio noob. My background is more Unix-related and mostly used to building things via scons or make. I don't even have much Eclipse experience.
Anyway, I am frustrated how it seems very difficult to move files between projects in VS. (I am running Visual Studio 2013). For example, suppose I have a ProjectXRel (release) and I want a ProjectXDev (development). I want them both to be runnable, and the dev version might have just a few editing changes that differ it from the rel version.
The intuitive thought is to just copy the files from ProjectXRel to create ProjectXDev, but VS seems to fight me on that (it wants to rename all the namespaces to the title of the project).
Also, some of the files, like .cs files derived from .dbml via OR designer, seem uncopyable, and rely on one replicating the process of using the utility to having valid files. I'm used to a project being defined by its files, but that's not really the case in VS. Instead it seems defined by process steps used to create and organize the files.
Also, do serious developers just use command line calls and powershell? That's seems harder, but at least you know what the %#$$# is going on.....
So, the basic question is, how does one replicate an existing project to produce a similar one for development purposes? (I know source control such as git could help with that, but that's not an option for this situation.)
Thanks!
You should be using the same project for both Development and Release.
The things that are different between Development and Release should be stored in a config file (web.config or app.config, depending on what type of project).
You should then be using Configuration Transformations to transform that .config file into Development or Release.
In Visual Studio, right click on the project and click Add New Item, select "Application Configuration File".
In this file you can put connection strings or key/value pair settings in the AppSettings element (MSDN Link).
Once you have your basic settings defined, you can then right click on the config file and click Add Transformation. This will add transformations for each of the Project Configurations you have. (by default Debug and Release).
It will look like this:
Now you can build deployment packages.
Or install Slowchetah and then when you press F5 to debug it will run the selected project configuration with the configuration transformation applied.
I would like to automatically generate *.creator, *.files, *.includes, and *.config files for each of several hundred projects in a large workspace. I would like each project to build using an external tool via a custom build kit and set of build configurations. From what I've read about QtCreator, it seems to me that the only way to do this would be either to generate the *.creator.user file for each project in advance and include the necessary build configurations, or to open each project, allow QtCreator to generate the *.creator.user file for that project, and then insert the build configuration information into the file. Rather than generating or retroactively editing an entire *.creator.user file, I'd like to generate something like a *.pro.shared file (http://doc.qt.digia.com/qtcreator-2.4/creator-sharing-project-settings.html) that could be identical for every project and wouldn't require messing with all the other user settings. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that there is any analogous *.creator.shared file that can be used by QtCreator to incorporate shared settings. Is there a better way to approach this problem?
The build settings are basically the reason why you can not share a .user file: They contain references to data that is specific to one Qt Creator instance. These are mostly ids for Qt versions, tool chains and kits.
You can create .user files, there should be no problem with that, provided you insert the ids that are used in your creator instance. If you do it wrong, then creator will just throw away those settings and then regenerate them using default values.
Make sure to include ProjectExplorer.Project.Updater.FileVersion or creator will update your configuration using a series of transformation steps, which will most likely break everything (provided you did not start out with data compatible with Qt Creator version 1.3:-).
I have a C# project which includes one exe and 11 library files. The exe references all the libraries, and lib1 may reference lib2, lib3, lib4, etc.
If I make a change to a class in lib1 and built the solution, I assumed that only lib1 and the exe would need to be changed. However, all dll's and the exe are being built if I want to run the solution.
Is there a way that I can stop the dependencies from being built if they have not been changed?
Is the key this phrase? "However, all dll's and the exe are being built if I want to run the solution"
Visual Studio will always try to build everything when you run a single project, even if that project doesn't depend on everything. This choice can be changed, however. Go to Tools|Options|Projects and Solutions|Build and Run and check the box "Only build startup projects and dependencies on Run". Then when you hit F5, VS will only build your startup project and the DLLs it depends on.
I just "fixed" the same problem with my VS project. Visual Studio did always a rebuild, even if didn't change anything. My Solution: One cs-File had a future timestamp (Year 2015, this was my fault). I opened the file, saved it and my problem was solved!!!
I am not sure if there is a way to avoid dependencies from being built. You can find some info here like setting copylocal to false and putting the dlls in a common directory.
Optimizing Visual Studio solution build - where to put DLL files?
We had a similar problem at work. In post-build events we were manually embedding manifests into the outputs in the bin directory. Visual Studio was copying project references from the obj dir (which weren't modified). The timestamp difference triggered unnecessary rebuilds.
If your post-build events modify project outputs then either modify the outputs in the bin and obj dir OR copy the modified outputs in the bin dir on top of those in the obj dir.
You can uncheck the build option for specified projects in your Solution configuration:
(source: microsoft.com)
You can can create your own solution configurations to build specific project configurations...
(source: microsoft.com)
We actually had this problem on my current project, in our scenario even running unit tests (without any code changes) was causing a recompile. Check your build configuration's "Platform".
If you are using "Any CPU" then for some reason it rebuilds all projects regardless of changes. Try using processor specific builds, i.e. x86 or x64 (use the platform which is specific to the machine architecture of your machine). Worked for us for x86 builds.
(source: episerver.com)
Now, after I say this, some propeller-head is going to come along and contradict me, but there is no way to do what you want to do from Visual Studio. There is a way of doing it outside of VS, but first, I have a question:
Why on earth would you want to do this? Maybe you're trying to save CPU cycles, or save compile time, but if you do what you're suggesting you will suddenly find yourself in a marvelous position to shoot yourself in the foot. If you have a library 1 that depends upon library 2, and only library 2 changes, you may think you're OK to only build the changed library, but one of these days you are going to make a change to library 2 that will break library 1, and without a build of library 2 you will not catch it in the compilation. So in my humble opinion, DON'T DO IT.
The reason this won't work in VS2005 and 2008 is because VS uses MSBuild. MSBuild runs against project files, and it will examine the project's references and build all referenced projects first, if their source has changed, before building the target project. You can test this yourself by running MSBuild from the command line against one project that has not changed but with a referenced project that has changed. Example:
msbuild ClassLibrary4.csproj
where ClassLibrary4 has not changed, but it references ClassLibrary5, which has changed. MSBuild will build lib 5 first, before it builds 4, even though you didn't mention 5.
The only way to get around all these failsafes is to use the compiler directly instead of going through MSBuild. Ugly, ugly, but that's it. You will basically be reduced to re-implementing MSBuild in some form in order to do what you want to do.
It isn't worth it.
Check out the following site for more detailed information on when a project is built as well as the differences between build and rebuild.
I had this problem too, and noticed these warning messages when building on Windows 7 x64, VS2008 SP1:
cl : Command line warning D9038 : /ZI is not supported on this platform; enabling /Zi instead
cl : Command line warning D9007 : '/Gm' requires '/Zi'; option ignored
I changed my project properties to:
C/C++ -> General -> Debug Information Format = /Zi
C/C++ -> Code Generation -> Enable Minimal Build = No
After rebuilding I switched them both back and dependencies work fine again. But prior to that no amount of cleaning, rebuilding, or completely deleting the output directory would fix it.
I don't think there's away for you to do it out of the box in VS. You need this add-in
http://workspacewhiz.com/
It's not free but you can evaluate it before you buy.
Yes, exclude the non-changing bits from the solution. I say this with a caveat, as you can compile in a way where a change in build number for the changed lib can cause the non built pieces to break. This should not be the case, as long as you do not break interface, but it is quite common because most devs do not understand interface in the .NET world. It comes from not having to write IDL. :-)
As for X projcts in a solution, NO, you can't stop them from building, as the system sees a dependency has changed.
BTW, you should look at your project and figure out why your UI project (assume it is UI) references the same library as everything else. A good Dependency Model will show the class(es) that should be broken out as data objects or domain objects (I have made an assumption that the common dependency is some sort of data object or domain object, of course, but that is quite common). If the common dependency is not a domain/data object, then I would rethink my architecture in most cases. In general, you should be able to create a path from UI to data without common dependencies other than non-behavioral objects.
Not sure of an awesome way to handle this, but in the past if I had a project or two that kept getting rebuilt, and assuming I wouldn't be working in them, I would turn the build process off for them.
Right click on the sln, select configuration manager and uncheck the check boxes. Not perfect, but works when Visual Studio isn't behaving.
If you continue to experience this problem, it may be due to a missing or out of date calculated dependency (like a header) that is listed in your project, but does not exist.
This happens to me especially common after migrating to a new version (for example: from 2012 to 2013) because VS may have recalculated dependencies in the conversion, or you are migrating to a new location.
A quick check is to double-click every file in offending project from solution explorer. If you discover a file does not exist, that is your problem.
Failing a simple missing file: You may have a more complicated build date relationship between source and target. You can use a utility to find out what front-end test is triggering the build. To get that information you can enable verbose CPS logging. See: Andrew Arnott - Enable C++ and Javascript project system tracing (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vsproject/archive/2009/07/21/enable-c-project-system-logging.aspx). I use the DebugView option. Invaluable tool when you need it.
(this is a C# specific question, but a different post was merged as identical)