2018-02-08 19:22 GMT+01:00 william.croc...@analog.com < william.croc...@analog.com>:
> > If I create a separate .pro file for lib and main, > I would then have to create yet a third file > to hold the common lines for inclusion in those first > two. That is not moving in the right direction. > May I suggest that having 3 files might be moving in the right direction. Do you think the fewer the better? Think about C++ classes and files. If you have 3 classes like A, B and C, it is common practice to have them defined in 3 header files in particular if they are complex classes, even if both B and C inherits from A. And hardly anyone would try to put the 3 of them in a single header file, even though C++ completely support having an arbitrary number of classes in a single file. > > The bad approach you suggest above is exactly what > I am looking for. :-) > > And then you could build it like so: >> qmake CONFIG+=build_lib >> make >> qmake >> make >> > > No problem. Those commands would go in > my (non .pro created) makefile. > All I ever have to do is type: make > > Even if it fits your needs, by using qmake in a non standard way you are likely to run into troubles when you will want to use qmake related tools like Qt Creator. Also you are likely to increase the time a developer will need to comprehend your project and its build mechanism. I do not think any Qt developer is expecting a single .pro to build both a shared library and an executable. If you do all this just to accommodate your taste in file count, please consider changing your taste and using qmake in a standard way. Regards, Benjamin
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest