Brandon, On 11/28/07, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - better scoping
- higher quality, outsourced documentation - outsource core language bugs > - popularity boost for 5 years - some advanced programming constructs gained I certainly can't debate those (unless CMake developers make significant changes to the core LUA libraries). Is backward compatibility with the current language a goal of the LUA experiment? I ask because the examples spoken of on this list appear to be trying to mimic the current CMake syntax. Thanks, George.
_______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake