Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

It would be great to have an ability to specify additional compiler flags #56

Closed
szhem opened this issue Apr 29, 2012 · 5 comments
Closed

Comments

@szhem
Copy link

szhem commented Apr 29, 2012

0.15.2-0.15.3 versions of erlide do not allow to specify additional compiler flags which can be necessary to have.
For example, if there is lager logging framework in the project additional compiler flags must be specified: {parse_transform, lager_transform}, but it's hardly possible with current version of erlide.

@vladdu
Copy link
Collaborator

vladdu commented Apr 29, 2012

You are right, the reworking of the compiler options page left some of them inaccessible. I will add back parse_transform. If there are other options that you need, please let me know.
http://www.assembla.com/spaces/erlide/tickets/1046-add-back-parse_transform-in-compiler-options-page

@vladdu
Copy link
Collaborator

vladdu commented May 12, 2012

fixed, will be available in the next release

@szhem
Copy link
Author

szhem commented May 13, 2012

fixed, will be available in the next release

Thanks a lot

@bilyushonak
Copy link

It looks like still there is no "define" compiler option in 0.16, right?

@vladdu
Copy link
Collaborator

vladdu commented Jul 21, 2012

The current beta of 0.17.0 (soon to be promoted to stable) includes a field where one can enter compiler options manually (in Erlang term format). It can be installed from http://erlide.org/update_beta. You can also wait until next week when I will see if I can set it to stable.

@vladdu vladdu closed this as completed Sep 17, 2012
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants