Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
Alexander Neundorf wrote:
CMake has some of that.
It has for OS:
UNIX
APPLE
WIN32
CYGWIN
MINGW
Cygwin is not an OS, it's a compiler.
The Bash that comes with Cygwin provides a filesystem environment.
Oftentimes when people compile on Windows in open source land, what
they really want / need to know is the difference between various
shells. Is it Cygwin Bash, MSYS Bash, straight Windows Command
Prompt, or something else?
And for the compilers:
Not sure it has GCC, but at least it has CMAKE_COMPILER_IS_GNUCXX
BORLAND
MSVC
For the Intel Compiler in KDE we currently check using
if(CMAKE_C_COMPILER MATCHES "icc")
So there is room for improvement.
There's coverage, it's just ad hoc, not canonized, and has an
inconsistent interface. At present this doesn't trouble me, personally.
I think mainly some of the cmake files in Modules/ and
Modules/Platforms/ would have to be extended. For compatibility
reasons I'm not sure new prefixes like "OS_" and "CC_" would be a
good idea.
It would also be good to look at other canonical (OS compiler library
etc.) specifiers before deciding on such a thing. Like the Boost
conventions, for instance. I do think any canonization should include
space for a shell specifier, and I don't think any extant canonization
does that. Shells are *exceedingly* problematic for builds. Can't
tell you how much time I've lost to backslash, escaped whitespace, and
double quoting issues.
The problem with the shell, is that you can run cmake, then run make
from a different shell....
For the most part that works on unix. zsh, bash, sh, csh basically
work the same. The trouble shows up
on windows. MSYS uses a version of bash, and MinGW uses the windows
shell, and cygwin uses bash,
zsh, or some other more like unix.
-Bill
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
