Brad King wrote: > The proposed daemon could help IDEs integrate with the CMake language > without re-implementing it, but we may not need such heavy infrastructure > for IDEs just to list targets and sources and allow users to edit them.
Do you agree that that's an orthogonal use-case (add file to target) to what is being proposed (help me debug my cmake files)? If you agree that the declarative spec is orthogonal, then do you still have some other objection 'in principle' to the daemon approach? > I'm concerned that the memory usage of a daemon implementing the proposed > capabilities may be too large to be practical (at least without a major > redesign of certain structures that tend to duplicate substrings, or > some kind of out-of-core approach). If we reach a point where the memory consumption issue is the only blocker I can try to trap Milian in a room one of these days to help fix it. Thanks, Steve. -- 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
