On Monday 01 August 2011, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Monday 01 August 2011, Brad King wrote: > > On 07/31/2011 04:09 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > I'm not sure which syntax I like better. The one with the macro feels > > > more high-level, but maybe hides too much what is actually going on > > > (which is not much). The one where the user must use configure_file() > > > directly feels more low-level, but doesn't try to make a secret of > > > what's going on, which may be better to encourage users to write their > > > own version files. > > > > > > Which one would you prefer ? > > > I'll add tests for the one we decide to use. > > > > I like the macro better. It will allow us to extend the capabilities > > later while retaining compatibility. If we let people configure the > > file directly then if we add more fields that need replacement in the > > future then old versions may stop working because there are no defaults > > for new fields. > > I pushed and merged now a 3rd branch > "WriteConfigVersionFile_2TemplateFiles" which does both: it provides the
Are you ok with this branch or are there issues left (...since it wasn't merged into master on Tuesday) ? Alex _______________________________________________ cmake-developers mailing list cmake-developers@cmake.org http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers