Brad King wrote: > On 07/08/2015 03:04 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote: >> I guess. I think part of the reason it seems wrong to me is that there is >> a platform id called 'APPLE' (different case) and a variable of that name >> >> There is also an existing GNU platorm/compiler id (same case). >> >> If the same name is to be used, is there any reason not to use the same >> case? > > All compiler id values use CamelCase or are acronyms. The variable > named "APPLE" is historical and meant to match the __APPLE__ > preprocessor macro. Compiler id values are different. > > What do you think of Ben's "AppleSwift" suggestion?
It made me wonder what would AppleClang be called if it was introduced in the future. If the Swift compiler id is 'Apple', and the Clang CXX compiler id was 'Apple' then we would have, eg Apple-CXX.cmake Apple-Swift.cmake instead of AppleClang-CXX.cmake Apple-Swift.cmake or AppleClang-CXX.cmake AppleSwift-Swift.cmake Seen this way, it looks like 'Apple' is the future proof compiler id and 'AppleClang' is the outlier (an alias could be introduced). So, I don't think the name 'Apple' is so strange anymore. Thanks, Steve. -- 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
