On 7/29/10 5:40 PM, Michael Jackson wrote:
Well luckily there are a whole slew of projects to take a look at.
HDF5 is one. CMake, VTK, ITK, ParaView are some others. Basically you
have a .cmake file that runs all the tests like looking for headers,
structs, functions and stuff like that. Each
I'm now at the point in writing CMake logic where I need to handle the
config.h.in situation, and either have missed the autoheader
equivalent functionality in CMake or it doesn't exist yet. Can
anybody point me to the right approach to this? I have so-far
found:
The #cmakedefine mechanism and
Well luckily there are a whole slew of projects to take a look at.
HDF5 is one. CMake, VTK, ITK, ParaView are some others. Basically you
have a .cmake file that runs all the tests like looking for headers,
structs, functions and stuff like that. Each result is put into a
cmake variable.
Thanks for the clarifications.
Perhaps my err in this discussion is by referencing the Find functions too
generally, and early on too specifically...
Philip Lowman wrote:
1. Just because you call find_package() on a package doesn't mean that
you need a preprocessor definition in your code in
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:27 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
Notice my original API suggestion - the project controls its own header - just
not the list of available items.
So essentially:
1) Cmake runs, finds packages, builds list
2) user add extra items to list
3) header generated
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 2:13 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
Simplicity is best, and I think the simplest solution means not having
user's bloat their CMakeFiles.txt - it should be part of the system provided
by CMake.
Let me list the reasons I'm opposed to your proposal of
Hi Bill,
Wouldn't it be better if CMake kept track of these variables internally.
I mean, usually the HAS_X variables are the result of calls to
check_include_file() and check_function_exists(). The Autotools handle
this under the hood.
CMake might keep a list of these variables, possibly one per
Marcel Loose wrote:
Hi Bill,
Wouldn't it be better if CMake kept track of these variables internally.
I mean, usually the HAS_X variables are the result of calls to
check_include_file() and check_function_exists(). The Autotools handle
this under the hood.
CMake might keep a list of these
: Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com
To: Marcel Loose lo...@astron.nl
Cc: cmake@cmake.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 7:44:23 AM
Subject: Re: [CMake] autoheader
Marcel Loose wrote:
Hi Bill,
Wouldn't it be better if CMake kept track of these variables internally.
I mean, usually the HAS_X
be included in the list
Just 2 cents.
Ben
- Original Message
From: Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com
To: Marcel Loose lo...@astron.nl
Cc: cmake@cmake.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 7:44:23 AM
Subject: Re: [CMake] autoheader
Marcel Loose wrote:
Hi Bill,
Wouldn't
James Bigler wrote:
If this feature comes to fruition, I would like the ability to specify
which flags make it into what header. In one project I worked on all
our configuration defines were in a single header. This caused
extremely long recompiles if something happened to change the one
...@kitware.com
To: James Bigler jamesbig...@gmail.com
Cc: CMake cmake@cmake.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:45:42 AM
Subject: Re: [CMake] autoheader
James Bigler wrote:
If this feature comes to fruition, I would like the ability to specify which
flags make it into what header. In one
BRM wrote:
How about:
# Each variable can have a registered filter name - packages/programs/libraries
would use their name
cmake_autoheader_add_variable(has_some_other_package, filter_name)
# user controls what the output file is
# User can generate a C #define method (default method if
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.comwrote:
James Bigler wrote:
If this feature comes to fruition, I would like the ability to specify
which flags make it into what header. In one project I worked on all our
configuration defines were in a single header.
Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com; CMake cmake@cmake.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:26:04 PM
Subject: Re: [CMake] autoheader
BRM wrote:
How about:
# Each variable can have a registered filter name -
packages/programs/libraries would use their name
cmake_autoheader_add_variable
@cmake.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:26:04 PM
Subject: Re: [CMake] autoheader
BRM wrote:
How about:
# Each variable can have a registered filter name - packages/programs/libraries
would use their name
cmake_autoheader_add_variable(has_some_other_package, filter_name)
# user controls what
to the project designer.
Ben
- Original Message
From: Clinton Stimpson clin...@elemtech.com
To: CMake cmake@cmake.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 2:15:25 PM
Subject: Re: [CMake] autoheader
How would this global auto header stuff work with two sub projects both
wanting to do auto
On Tuesday 31 March 2009, BRM wrote:
I think the better solution would be to have the various Find functions
(package, library, program) define a variable for that package to an
internal list - which is what I think Marcel might have been hinting at.
Something similar exists for FIND_PACKAGE()
On Tuesday 31 March 2009, Bill Hoffman wrote:
Marcel Loose wrote:
Hi Bill,
Wouldn't it be better if CMake kept track of these variables internally.
I mean, usually the HAS_X variables are the result of calls to
check_include_file() and check_function_exists(). The Autotools handle
On Tuesday 31 March 2009, James Bigler wrote:
...
Why not something similar to what you proposed, but without the
intermediate configure.h.in step and being able to specify comments and
perhaps custom strings. You could also specify things multiple kinds and
they all just get inserted one
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:27 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
Notice my original API suggestion - the project controls its own header -
just not the list of available items.
So essentially:
1) Cmake runs, finds packages, builds list
2) user add extra items to list
3) header generated
I have seen several requests for an autoheader type function to be added
to CMake. I have never used autoheader, but I gather it takes a list of
variables and generates a config.h.in file automatically. Does anyone
on the list have experience with autoheader? If so, what would a nice
CMake
Zitat von Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com:
I have seen several requests for an autoheader type function to be
added to CMake. I have never used autoheader, but I gather it takes a
list of variables and generates a config.h.in file automatically. Does
anyone on the list have experience
Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Zitat von Bill Hoffman bill.hoff...@kitware.com:
I have seen several requests for an autoheader type function to be
added to CMake. I have never used autoheader, but I gather it takes a
list of variables and generates a config.h.in file automatically. Does
anyone on
On Monday 30 March 2009 16:58:47 Bill Hoffman wrote:
I think you could do this pretty easily in a function, and a command
would not be needed. Anyway, does the API look good?
Looks good to me!
--
Cheers,
Mike Arthur
http://mikearthur.co.uk/
___
Am Montag 30 März 2009 17:58:47 schrieb Bill Hoffman:
So, what would the API be? I am thinking something that you just give a
list of variables and a file name.
set(VARS HAS_A HAS_B HAS_C)
set(STRING_VARS STRING_A STRING_B)
cmake_autoheader(CMAKEDEFINE_VARS ${VARS}
Same here
.. Original Message ...
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:04:00 +0100 Mike Arthur m...@mikearthur.co.uk
wrote:
On Monday 30 March 2009 16:58:47 Bill Hoffman wrote:
I think you could do this pretty easily in a function, and a command
would not be needed. Anyway, does the API look good?
27 matches
Mail list logo
