enabling source browser in visual studio 2003

lmc · ‎11-09-2005

Are there any plans to enable the source code browser for fortran in visual studio 2003 ?

It would be really, really nice if I could right click on a subroutine call and have visual studio take me there automatically.

Thanks,
Lynn

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎11-09-2005

At the present time, we are not licensed to generate the .sbr files used by the Source Browser. We know how to do it.

lmc · ‎11-09-2005

I take it that the source browser will not be enabled for VS 2005 ?

Ya'll really need to beat MS over the head about this. This is one of the strengths of Visual Studio.

Thanks,
Lynn

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎11-09-2005

It won't work in VS2005 either as long as we can't generate the .sbr files. The format of the .sbr files are considered proprietary by MS and we would need a license to do it (or risk losing our VS integration license.) We are discussing a number of things with MS and this is among them. We have things they want, they have things we want...

jim_dempsey · ‎11-10-2005

Promise not to throw-up....

Instead of creating a .sbr file could you create a dummy C++ application (from the Fortran application)that in turn can be suitable for the source browser. The dummy C++ application would not contain source code as such but would contain an identifier that you could then use to search all files for (or Hyper Text a link to the code).i.e. the dummy C++ application becomes a catalog of the Fortran routines. Then the next step would be to add a helper macro to find the Fortran routine from the identifier.

Jim Dempsey

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎11-10-2005

I don't think that would work - the .sbr file is processed during the link, so it would not do to have two applications. There may be other ways to handle this.

jim_dempsey · ‎11-11-2005

My thinking on this subject

a) The .sbr file is created during the compilation (by Visual Studio compilers)for use by the MSlinker.

b) the MS linker can link files containing .sbr files together with files without .sbr files.

c) You can do whatever you want in your Fortran compiler (that does not violate an agreement you may also have with MS).

d) Your Fortran compiler is already capable of producing a .ASM file

e) So why cann't your Fortran compiler procude the desired .OBJ file along with a stripped down other wise useless C++ source file that does nothing other than contain fascimilies of your subroutine names and arguments together with hyperlinks back to the .F90 source.

f) After producing the .OBJ file and funky .CPP from the F90 source then call MS's C++ compiler to compile the goofy .cpp file and also produce the .sbr file.

g) Then figure out how to get the .sbr file to link during the link phase.

I am just throwing rocks at Microsoft's Windows.

Jim

rase · ‎11-11-2005

The missing source browser is the main reason why I postponed the final switch from CVF to IVF for my production projects. Intel should convince Microsoft that enabling the source browserin IVF could generate additional sales for VS 2003/2005. Greetings, Wolf

lmc · ‎12-08-2005

Is there any news on getting the source browser in MS VS to work for IVF code ?

Thanks,
Lynn McGuire

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎12-08-2005

Discussions are in progress with MS. I am hopeful.

lmc · ‎12-30-2005

> Discussions are in progress with MS. I am hopeful.

Are we still hopeful ?

Thanks,
Lynn McGuire

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎12-30-2005

Yup. Licensing has been resolved. There are a variety of technical hurdles to overcome before we can say definitely.

lmc · ‎01-04-2006

Alright ! Hopefully this will show up in a Visual Studio 2003 compatible version.

Thanks very much,
Lynn McGuire

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎01-04-2006

If it can be done, I don't see why it can't be done in VS.NET 2003. There are many different pieces that have to come together for this.

lmc · ‎01-06-2006

BTW, I am not tied to VS 2003. We can easily move to VS 2005 if it is easier for ya'll to add the source code browser to the VS 2005 integration effort.

Thanks,
Lynn McGuire

rase · ‎01-10-2006

Great to hear that Intel solved the licence problem with the missing source code browser. I see forward to have the browser available in IVF. Greetings, Wolf

DavidWhite · ‎01-12-2006

I have previously alerted you to serious compile-time degredation of IVF compared to CVF. The lack of a source browser says that IVF is not as good a product as CVF, so why are you retiring CVF?

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎01-12-2006

CVF was effectively retired more than four years ago. I believe that Intel Visual Fortran, taken as a whole, is a better product. Yes, there are some gaps we are working to address, but there are many features in IVF that were not in CVF for which we had many requests over the years.

We would have included the source browser earlier if we could.

Steven_L_Intel1 · ‎02-01-2006

A question to those interested in the source browser... The MS implementation of the source browser has some limitations, such as no more than 32K lines of source per file, general inability to save reports, etc.

Would you find it useful if we provided a separate tool for browsing cross-reference information? It might hook in to VS so that you could "go to definition" in the text editor, but would also function independently of it.

I'd also like to know what sort of questions you would want to ask a cross-reference tool.

rase · ‎02-02-2006

I like the source code browser as it is in CVF, because it gives instantanswers to dependency questions andfacilitates quick access during development sessions. For more strategic planning and maintenance of large projects it lacks some features, the missing list is one of them. I use a third party product from Leiden University to generate cross reference listings, but I would prefer an additional utility integrated in IVF for that purpose. I said "additional",not instead of the source code browser.

Jugoslav_Dujic · ‎02-02-2006

Yes, that would be excellent; MS tool is broken on the issues of reports and exporting.