On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Nagy-Egri Máté Ferenc <csiga.b...@aol.com> wrote:
> Hi Nico, > > thank you for the idea. That idea occured to me too, trying to generate > the CMakelists.txt script from the desired front-end. Having taken a deep > dive into XML schemas, hardcore people even criticise W3C XML Schemas for > not having a mathematical foundation which make it difficult to reason > about backward compatibility of change to the schema. Using the CMake > script, a stateful, imperative script language as an intermediate > introduces even more threats, than using a not so well defined, but at > least stateless datastructure like XML. > I disagree with that statement because I do not see any issue in generating stateful language. autoconf generates shell script. bison, flex, and many others generates C code. Compilers front-end generate IR which is nothing else than a unified assembly language. Compilers back-end generate assembly language for various CPU. Correct me if I am wrong but all those languages are stateful and all thoses generators have been working pretty well for decades. I think the true requirement is whether the language being generated is stable or not. The CMake script language is stable and a lot of effort is spent to keep backward compatibility via policies. [...] -- Nicolas Desprès
-- 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://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake
