Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-17 17:30:26

>> So tl;dr; I strongly recommend placing all cmake complexity into
>> runnable scripts which generate .cmake files to be include()d to avoid
>> boilerplate, and keep the CMakeLists.txt etc completely free of any
>> custom macros or functions.
> 
> Niall, could you please show how an idiomatic CMakeLists.txt file
> should, in your opinion, look like, for a run-of-the-mill Boost library?
> Pick some existing library to illustrate the point, such as for example
> System, or SmartPtr, or even the simplest one, Assert. Or any other, if
> you prefer.

Sure, though I'm talking really vanilla cmake here. But I guess it will
narrow the discussion by demonstrating idiomatic cmake 3. Too much cmake
2 still kicks around. I really wish cmake would kill off cmake2-isms, as
in, refuse to use them.

According to Jens'
https://meetingcpp.com/tl_files/blog/bda/boostdepbargraph.png, System
looks the most tractable. I'll see if I can find some hours to do it up,
I can guarantee it won't be today nor tomorrow. Maybe tomorrow night
after the kids are asleep.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/