Interesting. So, sort of, but not really. At least not explicitly. I'm still interested in seeing an example commit (even if it's only theoretical and will never actually be merged in) whose explicit purpose is removing the OLD behavior of a single policy. (Is there such a commit which removed the OLD behavior of CMP0010, or is it too entwined in the parser improvement commits from the 3.1 release cycle as to be easily identifiable as a concise diff?)
Weird are the things interesting to geeks, right? Thx, David C. On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ben Boeckel <ben.boec...@kitware.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:24:03 -0400, David Cole via cmake-developers wrote: >> Is there a single example of a policy wherein the OLD behavior has >> actually been removed? > > Technically, yes. CMP0053 as NEW ignores CMP0010's setting and treats it > as NEW (because the new parser doesn't implement the OLD behavior at > all). But CMP0010 is one of those "almost assuredly a bug" policies and > really easy to fix (just escape the '$' or add the closing '}'). > > --Ben -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
