On 01/29/2013 04:23 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote: >>> that tll() will handle linking completely and partly setting up the >>> includes. > > I'm not sure what you mean by 'partly'.
I think Alex meant that plain directories cannot be added with tll for includes. However, we have to be careful not to mix up configuration of the target's own build requirements versus propagation of requirements from dependencies. The former should still use tid and tcd while the latter will now be fully handled by tll. >> What if only tll continues to allow raw target names and tid and tcd >> assume non-target without using a generator expression? In the common >> use case tll will now do linking/includes/defines for targets anyway so >> we will need tid and tcd only for real raw dirs/defs. > > Yes, I think that's right. > > As a somewhat real-world use of this stuff, see this patch to the kde- > frameworks branch: > > > http://www.steveire.com/0001-wip-remove-redundant-include_directories-calls.patch Nice! > So, the conclusion is that we can remove target handling from > target_compile_definitions and target_include_directories entirely? Yes, especially if it works for your real-world case. Whenever one really wants to use a target one can use the plumbing directly: $<TARGET_PROPERTY:mydep,INTERFACE_INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES> > Should we wait for the conclusion of the upstream/downstream/policy > issue in the other thread? Aren't these issues orthogonal (other than merge conflicts)? -Brad -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
