Subject: Re: [Tooling] Purview of SG15 and cmake
From: Gabriel Dos Reis (gdr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-23 11:52:26
| -----Original Message-----
| From: tooling-bounces_at_[hidden] <tooling-bounces_at_[hidden]> On
| Behalf Of Robin Rowe
| Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 9:07 AM
| To: tooling_at_[hidden]
| Subject: Re: [Tooling] Purview of SG15 and cmake
| Thanks everyone, for the feedback on my CMake suggestion.
| Ville Voutilainen said:
| > It doesn't seem wise to standardize a build system that is loathed by
| > a substantial part of the C++ community.
| Can anyone name any build system that isn't loathed by a substantial
| part of the C++ community?
What is the end game of that exercise?
The problem we face isn't really lack of a standard build system. Rather, it is a lack a standard way to describe C++ software artifacts that is consumable by build tools, packaging tools, and that promote tooling *comprehension* of said artifacts. It is relatively easy to describe imperatively how an artifacts to be built and installed. Everybody got that. What is needed is *comprehension* of the artifact's architecture.
Before we jump onto standardizing a solution, let's take time to ensure we have shared understanding of what the problem is.
SG15 list run by herb.sutter at gmail.com