On 2014-01-28 01:11, Andrew Hundt wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
I didn't look at it yet, but to be "optimally" useful I would hope that an
implementation of generating doxygen documentation would:
What we have won't be "optimally" useful, but it is "very" usefu
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Matthew Woehlke <
mw_tr...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
> Possibly :-). I'd tend to agree with Stephen that this isn't the best
> place to get into a discussion of git history rewriting. But I'll also drop
> https://help.github.com/articles/remove-sensitive-data
On 2014-01-27 14:48, Andrew Hundt wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
Andrew Hundt wrote:
I'm not well versed with the guts of git but are there any good
ways to do some cleanup?
If you have to ask, the details probably not something worth discussing
here. Adding a co
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andrew Hundt wrote:
> > I'm not well versed with the guts of git but are there any good
> > ways to do some cleanup?
>
> If you have to ask, the details probably not something worth discussing
> here. Adding a commit removing them is not goi
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Andreas Schuh
wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>
> > Andreas Schuh wrote:
> >> How often have you seen CMake code as the following
> >>
> >> add_executable(foo foo.cpp)
> >>
> >> ?
> >
> > I see executables with a single source file o
On Jan 24, 2014, at 10:49 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>
> There seems to be some mailing list problems going on (maybe Andrew didn't
> subscribe before posting... :/ Always subscribe to a mailing list before
> posting...), and my reply was rejected.
I had one rejected post because I was yet sub
On Jan 24, 2014, at 12:49 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Roger Leigh wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:40:54AM +0100, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>>> Andreas Schuh wrote:
>>>
On a side note, just today a co-worker asked me why the compiler cannot
find the header files when they were provid
Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:40:54AM +0100, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> Andreas Schuh wrote:
>>
>> > On a side note, just today a co-worker asked me why the compiler cannot
>> > find the header files when they were provided as additional arguments
>> > to the add_executable command
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:40:54AM +0100, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andreas Schuh wrote:
>
> > On a side note, just today a co-worker asked me why the compiler cannot
> > find the header files when they were provided as additional arguments to
> > the add_executable command. Indeed this was a reasona
There seems to be some mailing list problems going on (maybe Andrew didn't
subscribe before posting... :/ Always subscribe to a mailing list before
posting...), and my reply was rejected.
Breaking threading to respond.
On 01/23/2014 07:32 PM, Andrew Hundt wrote:
> Allow me to rephrase, could y
On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:17 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andreas Schuh wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 1:11 PM, Andreas Schuh
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Kelly
>>> wrote:
>> Another example: You have code for adding scripts as executables. What
>>
Andreas Schuh wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 1:11 PM, Andreas Schuh
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Kelly
>> wrote:
>>>
> Another example: You have code for adding scripts as executables. What
> are the generic (non-BASIS related) use cases for that?
>
Andreas Schuh wrote:
>> Yes, that's what I was referring to. I see why you have it. I'm not
>> convinced it should be upstreamed.
>
> I guess most people can live with defining a CMake macro for it if they
> want to.
I thought it might make sense for unit tests, but something else generally
intr
On Jan 23, 2014, at 1:11 PM, Andreas Schuh wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>>
Another example: You have code for adding scripts as executables. What
are the generic (non-BASIS related) use cases for that?
>>> You can define dependencies among them
On Jan 23, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andreas Schuh wrote:
>> How often have you seen CMake code as the following
>>
>> add_executable(foo foo.cpp)
>>
>> ?
>
> I see executables with a single source file only in dummy test code, and
> even then
>
> add_executable(foo main.cpp
Find one minor correction to my previous post below.
On Jan 23, 2014, at 1:11 PM, Andreas Schuh wrote:
> For example, in case of Python, you can “wrap” the script and have it act as
> both Windows NT Script and Python script by adding the following line at the
> top
>
> @setlocal enableextens
Andreas Schuh wrote:
> How often have you seen CMake code as the following
>
> add_executable(foo foo.cpp)
>
> ?
I see executables with a single source file only in dummy test code, and
even then
add_executable(foo main.cpp)
is more common.
>
> The basis_add_executable supports this use c
Andrew Hundt wrote:
>>
>> > Website: http://opensource.andreasschuh.com/cmake-basis/index.html
>> > GitHub: https://github.com/schuhschuh/cmake-basis/
>>
>> The repo is surprisingly large (67 mb) for something like this. I
>> consider such large files in a git repo to be bad practice. This is just
Hi Steve and all,
On Jan 23, 2014, at 12:47 AM, Andrew Hundt wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andrew Hundt wrote:
>
> > CMake BASIS is a set of utilities and standards created with the goal of
> > making CMake projects and libraries very easy to create, shar
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andrew Hundt wrote:
>
> > CMake BASIS is a set of utilities and standards created with the goal of
> > making CMake projects and libraries very easy to create, share, and
> reuse.
>
> Hello,
>
> There seems to be several years of development
Andrew Hundt wrote:
> CMake BASIS is a set of utilities and standards created with the goal of
> making CMake projects and libraries very easy to create, share, and reuse.
Hello,
There seems to be several years of development behind this already. Is it
newly public, or newly publicized? I've ne
On Tuesday 21 January 2014, Andrew Hundt wrote:
> CMake BASIS is a set of utilities and standards created with the goal of
> making CMake projects and libraries very easy to create, share, and reuse.
this reminds me a bit of automake...
autoconf alone was kind of ok, then automake was added to cre
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Mateusz Łoskot wrote:
> Andrew, this looks very interesting.
Thanks!
> (I'm tired of writing the same
boilerplate :-))
Yeah it seemed like every new library I wrote had the same boilerplate so
when I found this project I jumped on and started contributing.
On 21 January 2014 19:49, Andrew Hundt wrote:
> CMake BASIS is a set of utilities and standards created with the goal of
> making CMake projects and libraries very easy to create, share, and reuse.
> It also integrates a lot of useful new CMake functionality such as
> documentation tools and autom
CMake BASIS is a set of utilities and standards created with the goal of
making CMake projects and libraries very easy to create, share, and reuse.
It also integrates a lot of useful new CMake functionality such as
documentation
tools and automated packaging that a CMake user would otherwise have t
25 matches
Mail list logo