On 03/07/2015 04:26 PM, Gregor Jasny wrote: > On 07/03/15 22:20, Gregor Jasny wrote: >> Surprisingly "new-style" tests support generator expressions >> also within all test properties. Add a test for that.
As Ben pointed out there is already a test for it: http://www.cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=blob;f=Tests/GeneratorExpression/CMakeLists.txt;hb=v3.2.0-rc2#l228 Even though there is some documentation it is not covered in enough places as you point out. > This still lacks documentation. The question is what would be the proper > place(s) for this. > > I'd add extend the genex note here: > http://www.cmake.org/cmake/help/git-next/command/add_test.html?highlight=add_test > > But I also think all test properties should receive an individual note. > What do you think? I don't think the individual properties need it because the support is not specific to them. The set_tests_properties command documentation already mentions it, though it could be cleaned up with proper reST markup so it is indexed and has a link. The set_property documentation should be extended to mention it for the TEST mode. > If the "old-style" add_test lacks functionality how about deprecating it? The old style test signature is likely used far too widely to deprecate. One could extend the implementation of the old signature to warn if it sees something that looks like a genex. Thanks, -Brad -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
