On 23.04.2012 16:54, tobias.hun...@nokia.com wrote: > 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).
OK, maybe I find the time to squeeze all into the cmake plugin. > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
