Brad King wrote: > On 12/18/2012 11:02 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote: >> Yes. Do you have any idea of what you'd like to see generalized? The >> interception and struct for handling the INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES property >> itself? > > The cmPropertyMap/cmProperty infrastructure could potentially store > structures with the string values plus meta-data instead of just the > strings as now.
That sounds more complex to me. Would the possible meta-data be defined as a c++ struct? What would it contain? > Then we would not need special cases for certain > properties in the C++ logic, just some kind of a boolean or enum of > possible behaviors that is kept with the property value or perhaps its > definition. That also seems to take away the possibility of storing compiled generators and evaluating them multiple times. >> That would be fine if the arg can be a list. >> >> set(CMAKE_DEBUG_TARGET_PROPERTIES >> "INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES;COMPILE_DEFINITIONS" >> ) >> >> but then I don't think it's much better than: >> >> set(CMAKE_DEBUG_TARGET_INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES ON) >> set(CMAKE_DEBUG_TARGET_COMPILE_DEFINITIONS ON) > > The first one would generalize better and avoid special handling in > C++ for each property. Fair enough. Thanks, Steve. -- 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://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
