Separate LLParser and SyntaxEditor NuGet packages?

SyntaxEditor for WPF Forum

Posted 5 months ago by Malcolm Stockham
Avatar

Hi,

We've just upgraded from v19 to v21 so have been able to take advantage of the public nuget packages for the first time which are very convenient.  

We take a dependency on the LLParser in a library project which is consumed indirectly by both a WPF app as well as a service application.  Currently the smallest nuget package containing the Parser is ActiproSoftware.Controls.WPF.SyntaxEditor - but as the name suggests this also includes the Syntax Editor component assembly and a dependency on WPF.Shared package. 

The default behaviour of the .NET build system is to copy these assemblies into the output folder even if they are unused - and although this does no harm in theory, they are relatively large (3MB in total) and swell the artifact bundles in our build system!

As a workaround we have applied an msbuild "fix" to exclude these files at the relevant leaf nodes in our project dependency graph - but it's a bit messy and adds a maintenance overhead.

To get to the point - would you consider separating the Parser assemblies from the ActiproSoftware.Controls.WPF.SyntaxEditor package? 

ActiproSoftware.Controls.WPF.LLParser

contains:

  • ActiproSoftware.Text.LLParser.Wpf.dll
  • ActiproSoftware.Text.Wpf.dll

ActiproSoftware.Controls.WPF.SyntaxEditor

contains:

  • ActiproSoftware.SyntaxEditor.Wpf.dll

depends on:

  • ActiproSoftware.Controls.WPF.LLParser
  • ActiproSoftware.Controls.WPF.Shared

This would mean that non-visual projects need not import SyntaxEditor package at all and keep things a bit tidier without awkward build customization.

Many thanks.

Comments (2)

Posted 5 months ago by Actipro Software Support - Cleveland, OH, USA
Avatar

Hi Malcolm,

We can consider it for the future, but it wouldn't be quite that simple since the Text and Text.LLParser assemblies in that scenario should really be shipped separately if we would head down this path.  Additionally each premium add-on has at least one Text assembly of its own.  We'd have to end up adding 7 additional packages to support this, which could get confusing for customers.  We wanted to keep the package offerings simpler, corresponding directly to products.


Actipro Software Support

Posted 5 months ago by Malcolm Stockham
Avatar

Thank you for the response - I hadn't considered the premium add-ons as we don't use them - but I see your point.  

The latest build of this product (v21.1.3) was released 12 days ago, which was after the last post in this thread.

Add Comment

Please log in to a validated account to post comments.