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

[Manuel Klimek]

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.

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