On 2013-09-27 04:18, Clark WANG wrote:
I'm trying to write some MESSAGE() wrappers like info(), warning(),
fatal(), etc which may be a bit easier to use. But I failed to simulate the
correct MESSAGE() behavior no matter I use MACRO or FUNCTION. For example:
[snip]
FUNCTION vs MACRO shouldn't make a difference in argument parsing AFAIK.
The difference is primarily that FUNCTION creates a scope, while MACRO
operates in the scope from which it is called.
The behavior of MESSAGE seems to concatenate multiple arguments with no
separators. So maybe you could do something like:
set(msg "")
foreach(part IN LISTS ARGN)
set(msg "${msg}{$part}")
endforeach()
# ...do stuff with ${msg}
(I like ARGN since it is 'unnamed positional arguments'. Since you have
no named arguments, ARGV == ARGN, but generally speaking I can't think
of why you'd ever need to use ARGV.)
--
Matthew
--
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://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
