On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 04:17 -0500, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2008 9:53 PM, Alan W. Irwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My guess is YES, etc., are being interpreted
> > as (undefined) variable names
>
> Yep, that's exactly what's happening. The macro expands to things
> like if(YES)
On Jan 30, 2008 9:53 PM, Alan W. Irwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My guess is YES, etc., are being interpreted
> as (undefined) variable names
Yep, that's exactly what's happening. The macro expands to things
like if(YES) and the variable YES has not been defined. A month or so
ago I made a fe
On 2008-01-30 19:36-0700 Timothy M. Shead wrote:
[...]This produces expected results for all of the documented "boolean"
values: YES, NO, TRUE, FALSE, ON, OFF, etc. However, if I pass one of
those values to a macro:
macro(test var)
if(${var})
mes
Folks:
This seems like CMake 101, but I'm running into weird behavior testing
boolean expressions within a macro. I've reproduced the problem using
both 2.4.7 and CVS trunk on Gentoo Linux, presumably it is some subtlety
that I just don't get :)
If I run the following:
set(var YES)
