Just to clarify, my suggestion was assuming that each build only produces either static or shared libraries, not both.
Given that assumption, wouldn't it be better to define targets using a single name (without `_static` or `_shared` suffix), and decide in one place whether that target is defined as STATIC or SHARED depending on the `ARROW_BUILD_SHARED`? That way, we wouldn't need to switch on `ARROW_BUILD_SHARED` repeatedly to determine which target name to link. On 2025/06/03 06:05:45 Sutou Kouhei wrote: > Hi, > > Do you want a CMake target that can be used for shared > linking and static linking? For example, you want to use > Parquet::parquet for shared linking and static linking, > right? > > In my understanding, we can't do it with CMake. We need to > specify "SHARED" or "STATIC" when create a CMake target by > add_library(). > See also: > https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/command/add_library.html#normal > > Thanks, > -- > kou > > In <ca...@mail.gmail.com> > "[C++] Static/Shared Linkage in CMakeLists.txt" on Tue, 3 Jun 2025 13:45:36 +0800, > Eddie Chang <ka...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone, I've noticed that in our CMakeLists.txt files, we have > > multiple instances where we conditionally select either the static or > > shared version of a linked target based on a cache variable such as > > ARROW_BUILD_SHARED. For example, the following pattern appears in several > > places: > > > > if(ARROW_BUILD_SHARED) > > set(PARQUET_EXAMPLE_LINK_LIBS parquet_shared) > > else() > > set(PARQUET_EXAMPLE_LINK_LIBS parquet_static) > > endif() > > > > I’m wondering if there is a specific reason we don’t set the static/shared > > property of the libraries in a single location, and instead continue > > duplicating this kind of logic throughout the codebase? >
