James Mansion wrote:
Sebastien BARRE wrote:
Again: *deal*.
February 29th, 2010 *precisely*.
Special CMake/Lua day, the 29th.
That will indeed be a very special day.
Shame really. I like Lua, and I find that the CMake script language
seems designed to make COBOL coders feel they don't actually
have the worst job in the world.
So what exactly about the CMake language gives you this feel?
And a SWIG based wrapping of the C++ code would surely
allow extension of the core in 'soft' languages too, so that
generators could be develeoped and so on too.
But if we did that would we have a binary that that had all the
"wrapped" languages? CMake is meant to be a build tool, and not a
toolkit library. There are already adoption issues because you have to
install CMake before you can do a build. Imagine how much worst it
would be if you had to pick the right language variant of CMake before
you could build a package using CMake. I love SWIG and language
wrapping and it makes sense for a library of visualization or computer
vision tools. However, in the case of a build system it would be a
tower of babel.
-Bill
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
