Chris Osborn wrote:
I certainly understand the benefits of being able to seamlessly regenerate project files. My frown my mostly a reflection of what the faces of the rest of my team looked like when I told them they had to modify a CMakeLists.txt instead of using the Visual Studio project settings GUI. I understand why you need to, but it was hard convincing VS-only developers.
If a VS-only developer sees no value in other platforms, you might try to disabuse them of that. Particularly if your company gets money from other platforms. Then they're just being obstinate and pig-headed within their feifdom.
But if your company is really a VS-only shop, bear in mind that CMake supports *all* the various VS releases from VS 6.0 onwards. If an organization is trying to handle multiple generations of VS development in the same source code base, that's valuable. I even had an argument with one VS bigot that CMake should invest all its development resources into "porting VS to VS," that this would be the most valuable thing to the world. I told him the world isn't Microsoft, and warned him he'd get no traction with the CMake developers about such an extreme agenda, but it does say a lot about what can make a VS developer happy.
Additionally, William Hoffman pointed out an exotic trick using Makefiles to drive VC++, that this makes it possible to do big builds concurrently. nmake can't handle this. Not sure if .sln files can; I doubt it. Being able to use Makefiles with VC++ might also be valuable from a porting standpoint, as VS long since dropped this capability.
Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
