Hello,
Build performance is not an argument. it's already very fast.
Integration with various tools is a case of "I dont like it", it's not a
good reason for such a fundamental change, it can be resolved with local
configurations.
I cant find any good reason to change except, maybe, complexity, with
reserves. Again possibly in the "NIH"or "dont like it" category.
One more con: we add a dependency on yet another external tool.
As we say in french it's a hammer to crush a fly.
When a vote happen, my vote will be NO. I know it's not binding so it's
not counted, but I dont care. I'm against this change.
If the untold reason is to speed up github tests, then run less tests.
Do we really need to test build on 13 or 20 arm platforms when only one
config of the other architectures is tested, and the actual value of
these build test is dubious?
Sebastien
Le 22/05/2023 à 14:57, Alan C. Assis a écrit :
Hi Sebastien,
There are good cons and pros arguments for moving to CMake.
Just like many here I don' t have preference for one or another, but
we need to analyze what is better for NuttX evolution and make a good
decision.
The main pros of moving to CMake:
1) It is easier to integrate with new projects and IDEs
2) It will speed up the compilation of the building system
3) It will avoid cumbersome integration to make things work (see
Brennan comments)
The main cons of moving to CMake:
1) The current building system already works "fine" ("If it is not
broken, don't fix", comfort zone)
2) It could spend time and energy to maintain two building systems
during the transition period
3) People will need to learn a new too, although CMake seems easy at
first look, it is hard when you want to do something different.
I think I depicted the three more important point, case someone else
thing about some other important point of each side, please bring it
to the table.
BR,
Alan
On 5/22/23, Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> wrote:
I very much agree with all of these arguments.
Thats a too large disruption for too little benefits.
I dont want to be forced to use cmake.
Everything we use here to integrate NuttX is based on makefiles.
Why do we have to bring in yet another dependency? No, cmake is not
installed in our build systems.
Sebastien
Le 20/05/2023 à 00:23, Tomek CEDRO a écrit :
I am thinking about this. "If it works don't fix it" comes to my mind.
Current build system is amazingly simple coherent and fast. Building
firmware takes 17 seconds. Why change it?
Such change will flip everything upside down. Adds lots of work and
even more possible problems.
What would be the real benefit?
How would it improve that 17 seconds?
I think the practical presentation and comparison of results (i.e. ide
integration, ci automation) along with numbers (i.e. build time) needs
to take place before making any decisions.
