On 11/18/2017 03:08 AM, Tobias Hunger wrote: >> I'm not familiar with that IDE, but in order to be directly supported >> by a generator its native build system would need to support everything >> in CMake's code model (static/shared/exe binaries, custom commands, etc.). > > This is only necessary if that IDE has a built-in build system like Visual > Studio has. If the IDE uses other build systems in the background, then this > seems like overkill to me.
Yes. @llvm.999 when one uses that IDE to create a project by hand, and clicks "Build", how is the compiler then invoked? > Extra generators are a horrible hack IMHO and we should strive to get rid > of them and not encourage users to add more. I don't like them either, and they are a horrible way to do integration when the upstream IDE is interested in supporting CMake. The IDE should talk to cmake's server mode. Extra generators were created as a way to support IDEs before IDEs supported CMake (i.e. ecosystem bootstrapping). > I would suggest to write some python script using CMake server-mode to > extract data out of CMake and then generate files in whatever syntax > this IDE requires. That would be a good approach that doesn't require changes to the IDE or to CMake. It essentially implements an extra generator externally. The actual build system would still need to use one of the existing generators, such as "Borland Makefiles". -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
