On Thursday 11 August 2011, Michael Hertling wrote: ... > Alternatively, one might consider to introduce a new, say, > modifier "CONCAT" for the SET() command, e.g. > > SET(<variable> <value> ... CONCAT [SEP <sep>]) > > equivalent to > > SET(<variable> "${<variable>}<sep><value>...")
I'm not sure this is actually necessary. Personally I'm fine with set(foo "${foo} bar") It's just one line. For properties more code is needed otherwise. > again with <sep> defaulting to a space. This would preserve the > STRING() command's strict distinction between input and output > variables. Anyway, I agree that this whole APPEND/CONCAT issue > isn't a serious problem but just a convenience feature. > > Besides, David, due to the same reasons as mentioned above, the new > APPEND_STRING subcommand of SET_PROPERTY() is quite misnamed, IMO - > and quite long. Would it be possible to rename it to CONCAT before > it is released officially? In this way, we would consistently have > APPEND subcommands for list-style variables/properties and CONCAT > subcommands for string-style ones. We can do that, if other people think also that this would be a better name. Or "STRING_APPEND" instead of "APPEND_STRING" ? Alex _______________________________________________ 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