On 7. Sep, 2010, at 18:22 , David Cole wrote: > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Michael Wild <them...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On 7. Sep, 2010, at 17:30 , David Cole wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:23 AM, David Doria <daviddo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 9:18 AM, David Cole <david.c...@kitware.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The "Generate" button should be enabled after the first configure. >>>>> >>>>> It's not enabled because the prevailing theory of the day was that you >>>>> shouldn't allow generate unless there were *no* *new* cache entries >> after >>>>> the most recent configure... -- force users to pay attention to those >> new >>>>> red entries -- in other words, it's just history and reluctance to >> change >>>>> behavior that's "always been that way"... >>>>> >>>>> I've always thought that you should be allowed to generate whenever you >>>>> want to: I'd go so far as to say that "Generate" should be enabled as >> soon >>>>> as you open cmake-gui, and that, if there have not been *any* configure >>>>> steps, it would do the same thing as command line cmake: configure once >> and >>>>> generate, all in one click. >>>>> >>>>> Please reply with more feedback: >>>>> >>>>> How many of you would: >>>>> - keep the current behavior exactly as is, it's good >>>>> - enable "Generate" unconditionally >>>>> - something in between >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> David >>>>> >>>> >>>> David C., >>>> >>>> I fear all of the votes for "enable generate unconditionally" will never >> be >>>> cast because the users that really want/need it are not on the CMake >> mailing >>>> list. I'd like to cast 32 votes by proxy in favor of the unconditional >>>> generate button! >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> David D. >>>> >>> >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> OK. So far, we have these votes: 32 - 0 - 0 >>> >>> Anybody else? >> >> >> I'd say CMake should re-configure automatically until it is able to >> generate, then stop let the user take action (modify the cache and then >> re-configure, or generate). I could also live with no separate "generate" >> step, like when using "cmake" from the command line. Perhaps this would be >> the most transparent for new users, but for large projects it could be a >> nuisance. >> >> Not sure in which bin my vote goes :-) >> >> -- >> There is always a well-known solution to every human problem -- neat, >> plausible, and wrong. >> H. L. Mencken >> >> > "Configure" is always going to make exactly one configure pass. > > Any "auto-reconfigure until there are no more new options" behavior is iffy > at best, because you *could* write code (likely accidentally...) that always > adds a new option on a configure pass... and then the user would wonder why > it's taking forever... when it literally would take forever. > > The pause in between configure steps is why we have a gui. It's essential to > make things red and let people inspect the new things that just popped up in > case they do want to change the newly introduced options. If they do, > they're responsible for making the changes and configuring one last time > again before generate. > > But...... if they're happy with the values (as most newbies are) then we > should let them click generate right away. > > Michael, your vote goes with David's proxy votes as far as I can tell. 33-0 > in favor of enabling generate so far. > > Any other votes?
What I meant was that the curses and Qt UI's should behave more like 'cmake'. Michael -- There is always a well-known solution to every human problem -- neat, plausible, and wrong. H. L. Mencken
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
