On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 07:49:07 Nagy-Egri Máté Ferenc via cmake- developers wrote: ... > I believe CMake is an invaluable tool, but it could do far better. 0/10 > CMake users I’ve met say they are “happy” CMake users. The learning curve > is steep, and the skills gained are not reusable. CMake could gain even > greater momentum (not by ditching, but) by offering alternate input > languages with entities (classes, functions, macros, etc.) that feel > natural in the given context.
Well, the cmake language is not really pretty, but in my experience it is usually good enough. Having a somewhat better language like e.g. Lua may be a good thing. There is actually an advantage in not thaving a full-featured scripting language: users are less tempted to turn the build scripts into actual "programs" containing logic and doing a lot of stuff. I have seen that happen with scons builds... as developer you had to understand two programs: the actual software, and the build "program". There were already experiments with Lua and also with Javascript for cmake, but they didn't succeed so far. Alex -- 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
