Alexander Neundorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > A bigger one is that I think the two-level design -- cmake making makefiles
> > -- must inevitably have many of the same fundamental weaknesses as
> > autotools, Imake, and other makefile-generator systems. I am intimately
> > familiar with these and want to get away from that approach. As far away
> > as possible.
>
> What are the fundamental weaknesses ?
You tend to get a lot of bugs and complexity right at the interface between the
levels, simply as the result of the fact that you're programming in one
language (cmake/Imake/autotools) and executing in another. Symptomatic of this
is generated makefiles that are huge and complex with lots of mechanically
generated productions.
Imake and autotools are both notorious for this, and I would be
astonished if cmake does any better. The problem is intrinsic,
deriving from the weakness of makefiles as a back-end language.
> An advantage of cmake is that it doesn't only support generating makefiles,
> but also project files, e.g. KDevelop3, Eclipse, Xcode and Visual Studio, so
> developers used to these IDEs can continue using them.
As long as scons or WAF can run on Windows, I think the single-tool
approach is better. For one thing, it avoids the temptation to
quick-fix problems by hacking the project files, allowing them to get
out of sync with the 'real' master.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
Wesnoth-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
