Re: [cmake-developers] CMake, Ninja and Clang on windows?

Hi, to do this I currently use the following cross-compiling toolchain : https://github.com/mstorsjo/llvm-mingw I was able to build Qt (except webstuff since I don't use them) and a large CMake-based project with it for instance. Maybe it can be useful ? Best, --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http

Re: [cmake-developers] kwsysProcess threadsafety

> 3) Abandon the idea to parallelize AUTOMOC/UIC please no ! moc is a huge bottleneck in my builds (to the point that using verdigris <https://github.com/woboq/verdigris> instead ends up having faster build time overall). Best, Jean-Michaël ------- Jean-Michaël Cele

Re: [cmake-developers] Native Compilers

ke has the cmake --build . command that you can use, which tries to call your environment's build function. Best --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Ivam Pretti <ivamprett...@gmail.com> wrote: > When you use cmake-gui, below the b

Re: [cmake-developers] [CMake] Debugging find_package() search behavior?

> The find modules use find_* commands, and those use CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH. Not always, some people sometimes feel like doing it by hand from scratch with if(EXISTS ...). Sadly. On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Brad King wrote: > On 08/29/2017 11:33 AM, David Cole wrote:

Re: [cmake-developers] C++11 all features available?

> Thread support would be nice because Autogen could be parallelized perfectly. oh please yes. moc generation is almost 10% of my build time. --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Sebastian Holtermann <sebl...@xwmw.org> wrote: &g

Re: [cmake-developers] C++ IDE

> Visual Studio 2017 has the best C/C++ experience with CMake IMHO, Visual Studio's CMake integration is a joke in comparison to QtCreator and CLion. --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Nagy-Egri Máté Ferenc via cmake-developers <

Re: [cmake-developers] Future of ccmake and cmake-gui

t 3:34 AM, Eric Wing <ewmail...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 8/16/17, Jean-Michaël Celerier <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > @Eric Wing > >> I am not making a strong push for this, but I want to bring it up to > > at least get people thinking about this..

Re: [cmake-developers] C++ IDE

QtCreator is nice. --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 10:57 PM, Rolf Eike Beer <e...@sf-mail.de> wrote: > Am Sonntag, 6. August 2017, 17:52:13 schrieb Ivam Pretti: > > Can you recomend an IDE to code in C/C++? > > KDeve

Re: [cmake-developers] Module macros/function names with single leading underscore

n_target_name which may be at risk for the problem you're exposing. Best, --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Brad King <brad.k...@kitware.com> wrote: > On 07/23/2017 10:20 AM, Craig Scott wrote: > > maybe it's worth consi

Re: [cmake-developers] ;-list in docs

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Craig Scott wrote: > ;-list It's a shorthand for semicolon-separated list : https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.8/command/separate_arguments.html?highlight=semicolon -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check

Re: [cmake-developers] Splitting CMakeLib

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Egor Pugin wrote: > but CMakeLib looks too fat. In this age of link-time whole-program optimizations is this really a problem ? -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:

Re: [cmake-developers] Support for version suffixes

I remember asking for the same thing a few weeks ago on IRC because of a small behaviour change in cmake 3.8.0 rc2 that I wanted to put behind an if(version_less). Alphanumeric ordering would certainly work for most projects : alpha < beta < rc. (I generally use a0, a1, a2... b0, b1, b2...) Best

Re: [cmake-developers] [Discussion] Add python support for CMakeLists

(My simple user opinion): I'm not a fan of the idea. Not particularly because of Python, but because with this, now if I want to use a library that someone made with a CMakeLists.py in my project (for instance as a submodule) : * I also have to install Python on the machines where the build

Re: [cmake-developers] Current deficiencies of automoc

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Sebastian Holtermann wrote: > > A quick fix for the example would be to explicitly add the > headers-to-moc to the sources list. This has the nice side-effect of making your project much easier to use in IDEs. -- Powered by www.kitware.com

Re: [cmake-developers] Dependency mechanism of CMake

Hi, Did you read this page ? The "Build Specification & Usage Requirements" section clearly explains how it works imho. https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.6/manual/cmake-buildsystem.7.html and

Re: [cmake-developers] RFC: CMake precompiled header support and custom compiler based implementation

Hi, could you give a try to the branch ? :) Jean-Michaël Celerier On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:39 PM, David Cole via cmake-developers < cmake-developers@cmake.org> wrote: > Yes, that looks like it should work. I'll pull your branch and give it a > try sometime in the coming week

Re: [cmake-developers] C# support ready for review

Simple question : do you think that this would be useable in order to have a single build pipeline based on CMake for a Unity3D project that also requires some native C++ libs ? Thanks ! On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Stuermer, Michael SP/HZA-ZSEP wrote: >

Re: [cmake-developers] [Qt-creator] CMake daemon for user tools

There is also https://www.cevelop.com/ which is an Eclipse derivative, they may be interested ? Best, Jean-Michaël www.i-score.org On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 22:59:36 Stephen

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake alternative language

i, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:28 AM, J Decker <d3c...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Jean-Michaël Celerier > <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The problem is doing : > > > > list(LENGTH MyList NumList) > > math(EXPR MaxItList ${

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake alternative language

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > My personal opinion: if the full power of python would be available, the > build > scripts would quickly turn into real programs, because programmers would be > tempted to do so if all of python would be available.

Re: [cmake-developers] CMake alternative language

gt; > > Le jeu. 14 janv. 2016 à 13:35, Jean-Michaël Celerier < > jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Alexander Neundorf <neund...@kde.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> My personal opinion: if

Re: [cmake-developers] [ANNOUNCE] CMake 3.4.0 Released

> * The "CPackDeb" module now correctly excludes symlinks during package checksum calculation. > * The "CPackDeb" no longer uses fakeroot and system tar program for packaging. Does this mean that the ubuntu package manager will stop complaining of CPack DEBs ? Thanks for the great work :)

Re: [cmake-developers] [PATCH] Macro generation for relaxed constexpr

does not imply const anymore, so isn't this macro ambiguous wrt standard c++ ? On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Stephen Kelly steve...@gmail.com wrote: Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: I think there should be a test for the different allowed contexts of the ${prefix_arg}_RELAXED_CONSTEXPR

Re: [cmake-developers] [PATCH] Macro generation for relaxed constexpr

I'm referring to the const used after methods (struct { int f() const; }). Here is an example : https://ideone.com/C28SMn Best regards :) On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Stephen Kelly steve...@gmail.com wrote: Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: Qt 5 provides a macro for this context which

[cmake-developers] [PATCH] Macro generation for relaxed constexpr

, but not extended constexpr which allows for more complete functions. This way, code bases can reap the benefits of most recent compilers at no cost. Best regards Jean-Michaël Celerier diff --git a/Modules/WriteCompilerDetectionHeader.cmake b/Modules/WriteCompilerDetectionHeader.cmake index a3b73bb..f7af7ec

Re: [cmake-developers] [PATCH] Macro generation for relaxed constexpr

I think there should be a test for the different allowed contexts of the ${prefix_arg}_RELAXED_CONSTEXPR and ${prefix_arg}_CONSTEXPR macros. Could you extend Tests/Module/WriteCompilerDetectionHeader with a test for that? For sure, I'll do this asap. constexpr foo = ...; If I read