Hi all, I'd like to point you to a mailing list message of Brad King from a few months ago about alternative languages for CMake : https://cmake.org/pipermail/cmake-developers/2016-January/027379.html (damn, two years actually.. time flies)
> In summary, I think work in this direction should first focus on designing a declarative (or functional) specification format where most of the project information can be specified. Then a cmake-language command can be written to load and evaluate a specification file (as a transition). Finally we could look at replacing the entry-point language with something else. At that point we could have closures passed as parameters to the evaluation of the pure spec in order to get custom generate-time logic. Brad for those who don't know is one of the main (dare I say *the* main) CMake contributors (https://www.kitware.com/brad-king/). So, why not just go and propose the declarative QBS syntax as a front-end for CMake ? This would make the world a better place. The CMake people *want* a better language, and for these use cases, QML is certainly much closer to the solution than others. ------- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:26 AM Christian Gagneraud <chg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 at 22:18, Richard Weickelt <rich...@weickelt.de> > wrote: > > > > Ich schick's doch nicht an die Liste, ist wenig konstruktiv :-/ > > > No conspiracy here, but i have a few more questions (not related, in > > > no particular order) > > > - Did Jake left the QtC due to your early decision to drop qbs? ( I > > > personally do think that the decision was taken long time ago) > > > - Did you drop Qbs due to it's "unsolvable" dependency on deprecated > Qt Script? > > > - Any track record that Qbs was not fit for the job? (Please no "we > > > can't build Qt with it", as you cannot build Qt with anything but > > > qmake right now) > > > > Do You remember Tino Pyssysalo's ominous survey on the qbs mailing list > in > > June? I asked him explicitly for more transparency about the > decision-making > > process about the future of Qbs. Apart from a vague promise, I heard > nothing > > back. > > ,https://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs gives me: > Secure Connection Failed > An error occurred during a connection to lists.qt-project.org. SSL > received a record that exceeded the maximum permissible length. Error > code: SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG > > As reported on qt-interest recently, lists.qt-project.org is serving > plain HTTP over port 443. > > Chris > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
