As long as we're grumbling about MPlab... (or not, but never one to miss
an opportunity :-) )
Is it just me or is the way it insists on managing the project file and the
make file with absolute paths for every file a complete pain?
Am I missing a simple way to make it use relative path names instead?

-Denny




On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Martin G. McCormick <
martin@server1.shellworld.net> wrote:

> Peter Johansson writes:
> > The MPLAB-X IDE is based on NetBeans, which is in turn based on
> > Java/JVM.  My guess here is that the problem lays in how the JVM
> > interfaces with OS/X.  The OS/X API was designed with accessibility in
> > mind from the start which is why most native OS/X apps handle
> > accessibility so well -- if you code properly for OS/X you get that
> > for free.  If you are looking to point fingers, a more likely
> > direction is Java, not MicroChip.
>
>         I certainly don't blame Microchip. That's what makes
> this all so %@!** frustrating. This is all supposed to be the
> interface for the masses yet it is dependent on a giant chain of
> libraries and back-end processing that must work flawlessly like
> some Rube Goldberg machine in which one rings a bell after the
> dominoes fall, hitting the little man who lands on a fulcrum,
> catapulting the ball which hits the arm that taps the bell.
>
>         One of the things I really began to love about Unix when
> I began to learn about it years ago was the concept of many
> small blocks, each doing one thing well, combined to do complex
> tasks that the developers never anticipated.
>
> > However, you should be aware that MPLAB-X is based on top of
> > command-line compilers, and there is nothing stopping you from using
> > them with without the NetBeans/Java IDE.  You can use all of the
> > latest compilers with the editor of your choice.  Personally, I am not
> > a fan of "modern" GUI-based IDEs, so in my opinion you are not losing
> > anything by not using them.
> >
> > You may very well need an assistant to get the compiler tools
> > installed (which is indeed unfortunate) but once you have done so you
> > should be good to go on your own with the command-line tools.
>
>         If I ever figure out how to get my best Intel box to run
> gnome under Linux which also has a good screen reader, I will
> try this all again. It will still be depending on java but the
> platform may let the installer work. There is a similar problem
> right now with firefox for the Mac versus firefox for Linux.
> Firefox for Linux is reportedly very accessible in gnome. On the
> Mac, firefox is improving but it isn't there yet.
>
>         Thank you. It's good to know that the compilers are
> likely to work if the GUI will just get out of the way.
>
> Martin
> --
> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.