On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Chris Hillery <chillery-cm...@lambda.nu> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Chiheng Xu <chiheng...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 1:11 AM, <"\"Roman Wüger\" >> <noru...@me.com>"@mac.com> wrote: >> > CMake is a Makefile-Generator an nothing else >> > >> > Why would you write the Makefiles by yourself? >> > >> >> Perhaps some people don't like the time consuming invocation of CMake. >> >> Maybe CMake can generate relocatable Makefiles only containing >> relative paths for several major platforms, and developers "cache" >> the generated relocatable Makefiles in version control systems. Then >> builders don't need to invoke CMake. > > That's technically possible, but I feel sure it would introduce far more > problems than it would solve. > > It would also rather spectacularly miss the point of CMake. You could > equally well say "Maybe gcc could generate assembly code for several major > platforms, and then you could store the generated assembly files in version > control..." >
CMake is a very great tool. But its drawback is also obvious. It will consume large amount of time to generate Makefiles every time you want to build, especially for ultra large projects. Building can be parallelized, but the CMaking, like runing configure scripts, can't be parallelized. So, the "caching" of Makefiles seems benefitial for current and future mutil-cores systems. Normal developers seldomly touch CMakeLists.txt. So, in very rare condition, you need to regenerate the Makefiles. -- Chiheng Xu Wuhan,China _______________________________________________ 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://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
