On 12/06/2013 04:42 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> An advantage of keeping the name is that existing callers get the
>> speed-up immediately. Furthermore there will be less code left in the
>> old module to maintain.
>
> I think that is still true if the module just wraps the new function?
Yes, I
On 2013-12-06 15:42, Brad King wrote:
On 12/06/2013 03:11 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
On 2013-12-06 14:51, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
Are you sure you don't want the command to be renamed to
"parse_arguments"? The only commands containing "cmake" looks strictly
related to "cmake", and the ar
On 12/06/2013 02:51 PM, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
> Actually ExternalProject, like several other modules, would probably
> benefit on using the C++ implementation instead of having their own
> parsing, or using the cmake implementation, but that's for a following
> patch.
The ExternalProject
On 12/06/2013 03:11 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> On 2013-12-06 14:51, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
>> Are you sure you don't want the command to be renamed to
>> "parse_arguments"? The only commands containing "cmake" looks strictly
>> related to "cmake", and the arguments parsing does not look t
On 12/06/2013 02:51 PM, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
> If CMAKE_MINIMUM_REQUIRED_VERSION >= 3.0.0, the NEW policy will be used,
> but the author should also be warned that he should no longer include
> the CMakeParseArguments.cmake file, since it will be deprecated and
> might disappear in the fu
On 2013-12-06 14:51, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
Are you sure you don't want the command to be renamed to
"parse_arguments"? The only commands containing "cmake" looks strictly
related to "cmake", and the arguments parsing does not look that much
related...
FWIW, I was sort-of hoping it woul
On 05/12/13 14:56, Brad King wrote:
> Without a policy project authors will not be warned about the change in
> behavior that would be caused by bumping cmake_minimum_required(VERSION).
Ok, let's assume that we add a C++ implementation with a CMP policy
that does
* OLD policy = SKIP_EMPTY
*
On 12/04/2013 08:20 AM, Brad King wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 04:57 AM, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
>> +1, since this is a very useful feature.
>
> Actually after thinking about this over night I realized that converting
> to a C++ implementation is the best way to fix the empty argument handling
>
