On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 2:30 PM, Reinhold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Sorry for the quick interruption, but somehow I have the feeling this > discussion will start again and again and again, if it has ever appeared > to end. Here are my two cents... > > IMHO there might be a misunderstanding concerning Kitware's CMake > strategy: It is a domain specific language (DSL) for -- as this might > indicate -- one specific purpose and therefore, by intention, not a > general purpose (scripting) language; thus it concentrates correctly on > its (single & powerful) core task/challenge. An estimated set of 7% of > CMake's language commands covers about 97% of the usual cases. (Note > that I have not even thought about thinking about this numbers.) > > Please accept this as an almost completely serious "feed to a never > ending (?) discussion",
When I say the technical merit of Python, Ruby, or Lua over CMake script has not been demonstrated, it is speaking to this very point. Perhaps general purpose scripting *is* provably better for a large scale build, but I would like to see a large scale project that proves that, rather than assuming it. From a marketing and documentation standpoint, standard scripting languages are provably better than DSLs. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake