Hello, Responses inline to 1 and 2 below:
Thanks, Juan On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Michael Wild <them...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/18/2011 04:48 PM, j s wrote: > > Hello, > > > > There is nothing wrong with another build system. Not all build systems > fit > > everyone needs, much like subversion and git being suitable for different > > development styles. > > > > When I have the time, I will start developing my own build system. It > will > > have the following proposed features. > > > > Just my thoughts below, giving some reasons I think CMake is the way it is. > > > 1. Dependency generation by the compiler, so that the include generator > > understands the c-preprocessor. > > Well, cl.exe for one doesn't do this trick. This means, you'll have to > put it in your build system, and once you've done that, why should you > use the compiler then? Especially, since you'll want to be consistent > across platforms. > > cl.exe does this trick cl.exe /showincludes http://www.conifersystems.com/2008/10/09/dependencies-from-showincludes/ > > > 2. Tcl (or other) scripting language, which has clearly defined variable > > scoping rules and well understood semantics. > > There are many pros for this idea, but a very important con: People will > use it as a general purpose programming language (see what often happens > to SCons projects). Even CMake has this problem to a lesser extent (IMHO > mainly because it's a PITA to program ;-)). But I think some people at > Kitware are/were experimenting with Python bindings... > > This brings up a new requirement: 5. Clear delineation when things are done at configuration time, and things are done at build time. > > > 3. Ability to generate object files and use the same ones in multiple > > contexts. > > It's very easy to shoot yourself in the foot with that. Different uses > might require different compiler flags on different platforms. > > > 4. Ninja generator or built in backend instead of per platform native > > backends. > > I also was wishing for some "native" generator for CMake recently... > > > > > I've gotten the impression from the Cmake mailing list the first 3 are > not > > being planned for CMake. > > > > Juan > > Michael > _______________________________________________ > 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 >
_______________________________________________ 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