On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Thorsten Behrens <t...@openoffice.org> wrote:
>> functionality? Even if CMake eventually turns out to be too slow, >> would it not make more sense to write your own custom CMake back >> end rather than the configuration/generation front end? >> > I guess it's now my turn to ask for sample code here. ;) For a backend? No, sorry. I have never looked into that. But the issue raised earlier was that because CMake's Makefiles are recursive (or something) they are too slow, probably because automake does it this way and is slow. I personally do not think this will be an issue. When running on Windows, the time taken by makefiles when changing directories is insignificant compared to the time taken by the compiler. But I have only tried it under Virtualbox and not at all thoroughly. If, however, both the Makefile and MSBuild generators turn out to be too slow, the CMake developers are very responsive and would most likely work with you to improve the performance. Only after this fails would you need to look into writing your own backend. > Mostly marketing. I'm not too interested who else is using it, > whether it has reached a tipping point etc. etc., but rather how an > actual cmake solution to the requirements mentioned before may look > like (scaffolding, drafting, etc. totally acceptable - just need the > gist of it). :) Well, my CMake build env experiment was posted here again just now. Is that sufficient for evaluation or do you need something more? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tools.openoffice.org
