From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!fx10.ams1.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Suggestion about best practice with .gpr files
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <f6b41bac-39d2-441d-a89d-3485bf3fa99bn@googlegroups.com>
From: Per Sandberg <per.s.sandberg@bahnhof.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f6b41bac-39d2-441d-a89d-3485bf3fa99bn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <VsbtI.3946$ea3.1814@fx10.ams1>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenet.se
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 20:14:45 UTC
Organization: usenet.se
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 22:14:44 +0200
X-Received-Bytes: 3159
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:62065
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Well that's the way I have been doing it for 20+ years with some small 
twists.
GPR_PROJECT_PATH points here:
!foolib/
!...|
!...+-- foolib.gpr
!...+-- src/
!........|foolib.ads
!...+-- lib/
!...+-- .obj/
!...+-- test/
!..........|
!..........+--foolib-test.gpr
!..........+-- .obj/
!..........+-- bin/
!..........+-- src/
!................|
!...............+-- foolib-tests-test_1.adb
!...............+-- foolib-tests-test_2.adb
!...............+-- foolib-tests-test_3.adb
!foxlib/
!application1/
!application2/

Then the experience i quite similar to what you get with an "eclipse 
workspace".
But with the capability to a lot of other structural exercises, such as 
having a baseline ReadOnly workspace and then using GPR_PROJECT_PATH to 
point first to a private workspace and then the baseline.

/Persan

On 30/05/2021 19:37, mockturtle wrote:
> Dear.all,
> I have a problem that I solved in a fairly acceptable way, but I would like to hear from you if there are some kind of "better practices" that I could use.
> 
> The problem is this: sometimes, while writing some software, I develop some packages that could be used elsewhere, so I "extract" them in a library of their own with their own project file that is "with-ed" inside the project file of the larger software.
> 
> When I "isolate" the package into its own library,  I like also to add some testing code.  The problem is that if I declare the project to be a library project (which is just natural) I cannot have an executable.
> 
> In the past, I solved this problem by declaring the project to be a non-library one; nowadays I declare it to be a library project and then add a folder test/ with its src/ folder with the test programs and a specific project file that "with-s" the library project.
> 
> Let me try drawing a picture relative to a library "foo"
> 
> foolib/
> ...|
> ...+-- foolib.gpr
> ...+-- src/
> ...+-- obj/
> ...+-- test/
> ..........|
> ..........+--foolib_test.gpr
> ..........+--obj/
> ..........+--src/
> ................|
> ...............+-- foo_test_1.adb
> ...............+-- foo_test_2.adb
> ...............+-- foo_test_3.adb
> 
> I hope you got the idea.
> 
> Do you have any suggestion about a different organization?  Do there exist some kind of "best practice" for this?
> 
> Thank you in advance for your help
> 
> Riccardo
>