On 05/17/2011 10:43 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Wow. Well, the language (and thus the stl) and the compilers have
evolved - sometimes it's a shame if one has to support old versions
that even the compiler writers would consider broken, but there is no
choice - thanks for showing those corner
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 05/16/2011 12:37 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 05/14/2011 01:04 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Any news on this one? We're currently building more tools,
On 05/14/2011 01:04 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Any news on this one? We're currently building more tools, so it would
be cool to know when we can expect this to be more easily available.
If there's more work to do on my side, I'm happy to see it through.
Thanks for the ping. I've had the topic
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 05/14/2011 01:04 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Any news on this one? We're currently building more tools, so it would
be cool to know when we can expect this to be more easily available.
If there's more work to do on my
On 04/05/2011 12:13 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/05/2011 08:33 AM, Brad King wrote:
On 04/04/2011 12:01 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Done.
Thanks!
While running the test on more platforms I ran into a problem. On
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/05/2011 12:13 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/05/2011 08:33 AM, Brad King wrote:
On 04/04/2011 12:01 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Done.
Thanks!
On 04/25/2011 11:54 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Is just putting IF(UNIX) ... around all the stuff enough for that?
It's not just the test. The C++ implementation cannot handle all
generators. It should be taught to run only for generators where it
is known to work. Perhaps it can check a value
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/25/2011 11:54 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Is just putting IF(UNIX) ... around all the stuff enough for that?
It's not just the test. The C++ implementation cannot handle all
generators. It should be taught to run
On 04/25/2011 12:06 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/25/2011 11:54 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Is just putting IF(UNIX) ... around all the stuff enough for that?
It's not just the test. The C++ implementation cannot handle
On 04/06/2011 10:15 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
For your convenience, rebased onto current head and git format-patch'ed.
Thanks. I used that series to reconstruct the topic on master locally.
I will review and test further when I get a chance.
-Brad
___
For your convenience, rebased onto current head and git format-patch'ed.
Cheers,
/Manuel
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Manuel Klimek kli...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/04/2011 12:01 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Done.
Thanks!
On 04/04/2011 12:01 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Done.
Thanks!
I also have the previous patches ready (re-based with master). Let me
know how we'll go on about submitting all that.
I still have them on a local topic branch. See below.
Have you changed anything since then?
If you prefer to send
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/05/2011 08:33 AM, Brad King wrote:
On 04/04/2011 12:01 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Done.
Thanks!
While running the test on more platforms I ran into a problem. On
Windows makefile tools like Borland and NMake we use
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 04/04/2011 12:01 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Done.
Thanks!
I also have the previous patches ready (re-based with master). Let me
know how we'll go on about submitting all that.
I still have them on a local topic
On 04/01/2011 02:42 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
sorry for the delay, but I was busy with other stuff - please find
attached a proposal patch for the test - I don't know enough about the
cmake testing infrastructure to say whether that was what you
imagined, please let me know if I should change
Hi Brad,
sorry for the delay, but I was busy with other stuff - please find
attached a proposal patch for the test - I don't know enough about the
cmake testing infrastructure to say whether that was what you
imagined, please let me know if I should change anything.
Cheers,
/Manuel
On Thu, Jan
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:08 AM, David Cole david.c...@kitware.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 1/18/2011 1:50 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Since this is a big integration style test, is it also possible to
integrate a python test? (the
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 01/14/2011 06:19 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Attached are 2 patches for caching the definesflags and introducing
the options.
Thanks.
I'll look into testing next, any hints for what to look out for would
be appreciated
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 1/18/2011 1:50 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Since this is a big integration style test, is it also possible to
integrate a python test? (the whole test would fit into a few lines of
python then)
We'd prefer not to
On 01/14/2011 01:28 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
I'm fine with making it optional. Another option would be to make it
hidden, as we want tools and not users to interact with it. Your call.
Actually, with an option then the file name becomes moot:
$ cmake ...
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
On 01/14/2011 01:28 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
I'm fine with making it optional. Another option would be to make it
hidden, as we want tools and not users to interact with it. Your call.
Actually, with an option then the
On 01/14/2011 01:58 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Hm, I was actually going more for a bool option - I'd really like a
file name that's easily recognizable by a tool with minimal user
configuration.
Sure. If you are trying to create a standard file name/format then you
should choose a marketable
On 01/14/2011 05:46 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
I'm currently trying to figure out the best point where to add that
option...
In the cmMakefileTargetGenerator you can test for the option with
this-Makefile-IsOn(...)
Is there a good example I can base it on? So far I followed
CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE
On 01/12/2011 11:47 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Split up the patch - apparently I need ssh access to push the topic
stuff, so I'm just attaching the patches.
Thanks. That's pretty clean. In the final version of this topic please
add one more intermediate commit that optimizes GetFlags and
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Brad King brad.k...@www.kitware.com wrote:
On 01/12/2011 11:47 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
Split up the patch - apparently I need ssh access to push the topic
stuff, so I'm just attaching the patches.
Thanks. That's pretty clean. In the final version of this
Hi Manuel,
I think the goals of your work are important. I like the general
idea. One sure way to give such tools the same view of the code
as the compiler is to ask the build system to provide the information.
I'm a CMake developer but I also wrote gccxml. The latter is a
code analysis tool
Hi Brad,
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Brad King brad.k...@kitware.com wrote:
Hi Manuel,
I think the goals of your work are important. I like the general
idea. One sure way to give such tools the same view of the code
as the compiler is to ask the build system to provide the
Hi,
we're working on C++ tools based on clang to get the power of
automated refactoring and analysis that Java has known for years to
C++ developers.
With the attached patch I include a proposal for how we could export
the compile command line for C/C++ files from cmake for Unix makefile
28 matches
Mail list logo
