On Dec 28, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Muhammad Bashir Al-Noimi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/26/2013 12:57 PM, Kevin Krammer wrote: >> Right. Don't get me wrong, QMAKE works nicely for the feature set it targets. >> The more advanced systems like CMake become interesting when the project at >> hand needs to use other APIs additional to Qt, when you need to detect system >> specific differences, etc. > Sorry for silly questions:-[ > AFAIK Qt lincense don't conflicet with CMake ones so I wonder why both > maintains don't collaborate to make CMake the default make system in Qt? > why Qt guys re-invent the wheel (QBS) while CMake already exists? CMake is … not the ultimate perfect build system, not by a long way. One thing is has in common with qmake is that it’s not a build system so much as it’s a makefile generator - so it, too, inherits many of the limitations of make. It has a fairly unpleasant user experience too. QBS looks like it may be quite nice. There are much more interesting build systems to compare QBS with than cmake, though - gyp, ninja, scons, waf and jam are some that spring to mind. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
