[cfe-dev] is configure+make dead yet?

Manuel Klimek klimek at google.com
Wed Jun 27 07:44:16 PDT 2012

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote:

> David Röthlisberger <david at rothlis.net>
> writes:
> > On 21 Jun 2012, at 01:19, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> >> cmake, while ugly, can be made to support all of our use cases. There
> >> are some use cases that autoconf+make can't support,
> >
> > So far I have assumed that "use cases that autoconf+make can't support"
> > is referring to Windows support. (I am not a Windows user myself.)
> CMake was introduced for supporting Visual Studio, because autoconf is
> useless for that toolset and the hand-made VS project files that were in
> place at the time were inconvenient for several reasons.
> > But the following two statements left me wondering: Are people actually
> > using LLVM's CMake build system on Windows? Or are they using the
> > autoconf system with something like Cygwin / MinGW?
> >
> >> CMake is not even capable of [...] setting up project files to build
> >> LLVM as a DLL so they can build a compiler atop it
> > -- Mason Wheeler, On 27 Jun 2012, at 13:29
> See my reply to that assertion on my other message.
> >> CMake generates gigantic project files for IDEs like Visual Studio and
> >> Xcode, which causes those IDEs to behavior very poorly, with long
> >> project load times and sluggish overall performance. It's a significant
> >> productivity problem.
> > -- Douglas Gregor, On 26 Jun 2012, at 17:42
> > (on thread "CMake Question: Do we need to support stand-alone builds?")
> I don't know if Doug measured the impact on Visual Studio performance
> specifically caused by CMake, compared to non-CMake project
> files. AFAIK, CMake is the only existing option for working with Visual
> Studio, so I have no idea of what's the point of Doug here.

Doug specifically mentioned Xcode. For VS CMake does support project()s
which you can open by themselves in the IDE, including all dependencies.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20120627/6c0a23af/attachment.html>

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list