> On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 07:28:02AM -0800, Andrew Roark wrote:
> > > Do you think Lua would help here, I mean, If it were supported
> > > by
> > >
> > cmake?
> >
> > Sorry Rod - I don't know what you mean here. My apologies.
>
> Ok, rephrasing:
>
> If the language cmake uses were Lua, instead of cmake script, would
> it be easier to tackle more complicated build tasks (like the
> ones you've mentioned previously)?
It's an interesting option.
On the one hand, the CMake script language, though a little odd, is quite
simple and reasonably powerful for describing "meta-make" information.
On the other hand, I don't feel it is realistically powerful enough to do
significant acts - nor do I really think it should, there are other
tools/languages for that.
I used scons for some time before settling on CMake, and though I liked that
considerably because I could use a "real" programming language for describing
make actions, and lots of other real programming work and class abstractions,
ultimately I really loved CMake's simplicity and that it trusted other tools
(make, gcc, vstudio, ...) to do the real work.
For my specific use cases - building distribution archives, for example - I
feel that is the job of a separate tool/program, not driven purely by the make
system infrastructure.
But the idea of a more powerful programming language that drives the same cmake
logic is pretty interesting....
Andrew
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
