Jörg wrote: > It is potentially a valid use case to have different "tool chains" > (resp. makefile generators) that use ninja as build tool.
Yes, but a tool chain inside Creator is a compiler/linker and does not create makefiles:-) > In that case it would be good if we were reusing the ninja support and > not hacking it into the cmake plugin. Yes, the ninja support should be as stand alone as possible, I fully agree. My point is that if the cmake plugin is going to build with ninja, then the cmake plugin needs to know about the ninja support we have somehow and set up the necessary build steps and configure cmake to produce the ninja Makefiles (whatever they are called). Whether the cmake plugin does so because includes the ninja code or because it depends on a "ninja-plugin" does not really matter for now I think. > But as long as there isn't any other plugin that needs to use ninja the > "reusing effort" can be delayed IMO. Yeap. Best Regards, Tobias Tobias Hunger Software Engineer Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks Nokia gate5 GmbH Firmensitz: Invalidenstr. 117, 10115 Berlin, Germany Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Berlin: HRB 106443 B Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnummer: DE 812 845 193 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Halbherr, Karim Tähtivuori _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
