> How much custom c++ code does it contains for just qt? which build system which supports automatic calling of moc doesn't have specific code for qt ?
------- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Ray Donnelly <[email protected]> wrote: > As someone who works on a cross platform distribution let me tell you that > cmake is plain terrible. How much custom c++ code does it contains for just > qt? Loads, absolutely tonnes or rubbish. > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 1:49 PM Jean-Michaël Celerier < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > There is a build system that fulfills all of Thiago's points, and it is >> already widely used in the Qt community: CMake. >> >> +1, I was flabbergasted when the big objection against CMake in Qt 6 >> boiled down to "it does not supports all the architectures that Qt >> supports", so instead of contributing them - or hell, even forking CMake >> for those specific architectures (what are them ? I use cmake for windows, >> mac, linux, android, ios and the toolchain file allows for a lot of >> customization), what, create a new build system from scratch that splits >> the C++ community further ? There would be so much to gain with a better >> relationship between Qt and CMake. >> >> Best, >> ------- >> Jean-Michaël Celerier >> http://www.jcelerier.name >> >> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Kevin Kofler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Bogdan Vatra via Development wrote: >>> > Anyway IMHO is more important to have a clean, nice and easy to use >>> syntax >>> > and to be tooling friendly than 1.b. >>> >>> A custom build system is always a major pain point for distributions. A >>> circular dependency (what Thiago's 1.b forbids) makes it particularly >>> painful. How should we bootstrap new architectures or entirely new >>> distributions if we cannot build Qt due to the circular dependency >>> between >>> Qt and its build tool? This is a showstopper. >>> >>> > GN[1] is another example of build system which didn't care too much >>> about >>> > 1.a,b,c and it still used in quite big projects (e.g. chrome, >>> fuchsia). To >>> > my huge surprise, they managed to move it into a separate repo and >>> remove >>> > all chromium dependencies (yep, a few months ago you had to checkout >>> the >>> > entire chromium repo to build it :) ). >>> >>> GN (and its predecessor Gyp) is universally hated by distribution >>> packagers >>> for its non-standardness, weirdness, lack of documentation (including >>> third- >>> party documentation such as tutorials, an issue inherent to custom build >>> systems) and lack of flexibility (custom build systems are never as >>> powerful >>> as widely-used general-purpose build systems). >>> >>> QtWebEngine is a particular pain to package because it uses TWO custom >>> build >>> systems (QMake and GN). >>> >>> The Chromium mess is also what prompted Spot to write the list of FAILs >>> [https://spot.livejournal.com/308370.html] I have already linked to >>> elsewhere in this thread. >>> >>> >>> There is a build system that fulfills all of Thiago's points, and it is >>> already widely used in the Qt community: CMake. >>> >>> Kevin Kofler >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Development mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Development mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >> >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
