Subject: Re: [boost] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
From: Ion GaztaÃ±aga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-19 12:19:55
On 19/07/2017 3:48, John McFarlane via Boost wrote:
> I'm sure this is how a lot of C++ users out there feel. Yes, anyone who
> can learn C++ can learn another build system. But why require more burden
> than is strictly necessary? CMake is the very clear trend across the
> broader community. Yes, it's far from perfect -- despite a monumental
> clean-up effort. But more developer systems have CMake installed already.
CMake, for instance, does not really build. AFAIK, it generates build
instructions for the real build system.
This is unacceptable to me, I want something that really builds the
program and also runs tests from the command line, I want to use the
same commands in Windows, Linux, FreeBSD and other systems where I test
my software. I don't want to waste my time recreating MSVC projects
every time I build. I want regression tests to continue working nicely
and portable passing common useful options that work in every system.
CMake is popular, no doubt. So is autotools, and no one is proposing it
for Boost. I have no problems to switch to CMake if:
- Cmake does everything Boost.Build does with the same or less work.
- Cmake performance is equal or better.
CMake popularity is not important for me as a Boost programmer, in some
years CMake will be replaced by another super-popular build system. For
users we can automatically generate CMake projects from Boost.Build, and
maybe other popular build systems.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk