On Thursday 09 June 2011, BRM wrote: > ----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Alexander Neundorf <[email protected]> > > [snip] > > > > - it needs to feed an IDE with a useful understanding of the project > > > > > > structure (not some random foo.o targets whose existence the IDE > > > must divine out of thin air) > > > > CMake can easily put all existing targets into the project file for the > > IDE, the IDE doesn't have to guess them. > > Last I used CMake, that really depended on what you wanted to do. > For instance, Header Files only made it into the output generated project > (e.g. VC++ project) _if_ you also wanted to do pre-compiled headers (which > I personally detest and don't use). > It was also very difficult to organize the files in the display of the IDE > output generated projects - e.g. grouping them together for logical > purposes. (There was a way to do it, I forget how off hand, but it wasn't > very intuitive.)
Probably using the source_group() command. > So, I'd very strong advocate that whatever tool it has maintain QMake's > ability to differentiate between source and headers and put headers into > the project files, This can be done by the generator. At least the KDevelop3 generator and I think also the CodeBlocks generator automatically check whether there's a <name>.h file in the same directory for each <name>.cpp file and add that header to the project if found. > and even go one step further of being able to do IDE > Display Folders so that both could be logically organized - e.g. headers, > headers\protocol, etc. This could be done by the IDE completely independent from cmake, or cmake can prepare such groups. E.g. the KDevelop3 generator generates some groups, I think it was Header, Sources, UI-files. Alex _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
