Community
Participate
Working Groups
In the course of looking at bug 330288, I noticed this bundle named org.eclipse.rephraserengine That seems to be mis-named to me. There is no "rephraserengine" project, that I know of. Seems 'ptp' or 'photran' should be that third field? Perhaps org.eclipse.ptp.rehraserengine? Now, don't just blindly change it, if it has API, or a long history of being that way ... after all, many in the platform itself are sort of misnamed, such as org.eclipse.swt .... so feel free to close as 'wontfix' if seems it would would be disruptive. Then it'll be documented why it has to remain that way. But, thought I'd just mention it in case it is new and/or relatively easy to change. But, again, not a showstopper if it would be too disruptive or breaking. Thanks for considering.
Jeff, are there any issues with changing this to org.eclipse.photran.rephraserengine?
Hi David, Thanks for the bug report. This was discussed briefly on the Photran(-dev?) mailing list, but it's probably good to have it documented here. The "org.eclipse.rephraserengine" naming was intentional. Photran is actually divided into two major architectural components: Photran itself, which supports Fortran development in Eclipse, and the Rephraser Engine, which contains a number of language independent components and extension points to support refactoring, language-based searching, indexing, etc. We originally had the code that became the Rephraser Engine mixed in with the Photran code, but developers (particularly ones new to the project) were having trouble remembering which classes were intended to be language-independent and which ones could have Fortran-specific code in them. Several times I had to reject patches, trying to explain, "Yes, this is a class in Photran, but you can't put any Fortran-specific code in it" (which raised a few eyebrows). Separating the Fortran-specific and language-independent parts into two separate features has alleviated that problem. At UIUC, we have several different refactoring tools that all depend on the Rephraser Engine, so it does make sense to keep it a separate feature from Photran. (Photran is the only tool that we've contributed to the Eclipse Foundation, since the others are still prototypes.) We haven't made an effort to publicize the Rephraser API, since it's still changing somewhat, but I hope some other Eclipse projects can benefit from it in the future. It does have some nice features, like the ability to contribute a new refactoring with basically one line of XML and one Java class. I hope this explains the situation.
> I hope this explains the situation. Yes, thanks for documenting.
