On 07/07/2010 09:40 AM, Chris Hillery wrote: > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:32 AM, Michael Hertling <mhertl...@online.de>wrote: > >> IMO, things aren't sooo bad. ;-) >> >> [100 lines of explanation of how SET() behaves in 6 different ways elided] >> > > ....I think you've just proven my point. Thanks! :)
Actually, I intended to disprove your point to a certain extend. ;) SET() works as expected except for SET(VAR "..." CACHE <TYPE> "...") and the related OPTION() in some cases. If VAR does not have an entry in the cache or in the current scope SET() behaves reasonable: Afterwards, both entries exist and are equal. If VAR already has both entries SET() does not trade off the cache for the current scope which could be considered as reasonable, too. Nevertheless, the UNINITIALIZED thing is pretty weird, indeed. Regards, Michael _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
