CMake defines "FALSE" as a string that's empty, 0, N, NO, OFF, FALSE,
NOTFOUND, or -NOTFOUND. I just realized that my regexes are
not safe with respect to capturing the letter "n".
set(sillystring "The rain in spain")
string(REGEX MATCH
".$"
thematch "${sillystring}")
if(thematch)
message("
Using CVS from Dec 15, 2007:
540:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:Build]$ bin/cmake --help-variable
"CMAKE__LINK_EXECUTABLE"cmake version 2.5-20071215
Argument "CMAKE__LINK_EXECUTABLE" to --help-variable is not a
defined variable. Use --help-variable-list to see all
Bill Hoffman escreveu:
>
> However, I never intended for the language to be used as a general
> purpose programming tool. There are much better languages out there for
> that type of thing.
I couldn't agree more.
> As to why I regret starting this thread, I think it is a waste of my
> time. Mos
On Dec 15, 2007 3:14 PM, Alexander Neundorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> With the property stuff cmake is already becoming more OO.
To the extent that it's true, I suppose a marketing pitch could be
made for CMake on that basis, to appease people who want OO. Would
need a good way to display th
On 15.12.07 21:14:40, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Saturday 15 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> > A recent comment of his, regarding KDE's use of CMake:
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.scons.user/15656/focus
> >=15659 "* Cmake scripts are easily readable from IDE
On Saturday 15 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 1:55 PM, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 2007 12:41 PM, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > There are some vocal
> > > complainers about the language, but I suspect there is a silent
> > >
Alan W. Irwin wrote:
So let me rephrase the question. Are the CMake developers happy with the
present state of the dependencies system or are you considering some major
changes there because of such issues as the difficulties in getting
parallel
builds to work properly for projects like PLplot
On 2007-12-15 12:57-0500 Brad King wrote:
Alan W. Irwin wrote:
Well, it turns out I had to add four different target dependencies to the
CMake-based PLplot build system to get rid of the parallel build problems
I
was having on my Core Duo box. One of them was pretty subtle so I missed
it
fo
On Dec 15, 2007 1:55 PM, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 12:41 PM, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > There are some vocal
> > complainers about the language, but I suspect there is a silent majority
> > that really don't care,
>
> CMake is a self-selecti
BTW it wouldn't offend me personally if you don't want to respond any
more to this *right now*. You seem harried about other work you feel
you need to get done. I do think "Lua boosters" need to "fan out" to
other build communities and develop more compelling arguments for why
expressive, standar
Alan W. Irwin wrote:
Well, it turns out I had to add four different target dependencies to the
CMake-based PLplot build system to get rid of the parallel build problems I
was having on my Core Duo box. One of them was pretty subtle so I
missed it
for my first review of the dependencies. Nevert
OK, so here are my thoughts on using CMake as a full scripting language. ...
I think it is feature/mission creep. When I started CMake, I was trying
to make a tool that would make building software with native tools easy
for non build system types of developers (mostly researchers). Usually
Rodolfo Lima wrote:
Alexander Neundorf escreveu:
On Friday 14 December 2007, Bill Hoffman wrote:
That said, an automatic way of running a cmake script at build time as
part of a custom_command might be a good feature.
See bug report #3604 :-)
I think a dig on old bug reports could reveal v
http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/CMakeConfigAndBuild
--
Mike Jackson Senior Research Engineer
Innovative Management & Technology Services
On Dec 15, 2007, at 4:16 AM, Brandon Van Every wrote:
This discussion made me want to kill the monster that jam (and bjam)
became for me. People
On Dec 14, 2007 10:57 PM, Rodolfo Lima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brandon Van Every escreveu:
>
> > Most of my concerns about nicety of
> > language are strategic, not tactical.
>
> Let's not forget that cmake is being used by KDE, I think they wouldn't
> change again their build system :)
By ha
On Dec 14, 2007 8:45 PM, Alexander Neundorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 14 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> > On Dec 14, 2007 2:38 PM, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It really boils down to this: There is no way we can ever stop
> > > supporting the current cmake
16 matches
Mail list logo
