Andreas Schneider a écrit :
On Sunday 23 November 2008 17:43:53 cyril_wobow wrote:
Sure, I guess we are all here because CMake is a very powerful suite,
with tons of functionalities and useful abstractions. But I challenge
anyone to seriously tell me that he/she enjoys writing CMake script. As
soon as you don't have to only set a bunch of variables and call a few
built-in macros any more, you get crazy. Do a bit of string processing,
you get crazy. Write/call your own functions and macros, with argument
passing and returning, you get crazy.
I haven't had problems reading CMake files yet. Maybe it depends on the
programmer who writes the CMake files. My first CMake project was Wengophone
(now Qutecom).
To me, that is definitely THE weakest point of CMake, along with its
fairly arnarchic documentation.
Well I've started to learn CMake just with reading the manpage. All you need
is in there. Well there are some people who are not used to read manpages. I
think that is the problem.
However there is #cmake @ freenode for those who need help.
Cheers,
-- andreas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
I should really not be feeding trolls but here is a quick reply.
It surely depends on the programmer. And it does not matter. All I say
is that it is kind of a pity to have such a powerful tool and such a
poor scripting facility. I may be using CMake partly for what it is
*not* (i.e. some advanced-ish build scripting) and I swear to god, I
suffer doing that. I may be a mediocre build engineer (I prefer spending
my time developing), but I still dream of the perfect build system that
even I could use.
Thanks for your constructive spirit,
Cyril
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
