3 ms·

I always felt that for small setups, makefiles are much more concise and easy to understand. And more generic. Cmakefile.txt seems always really messy and intro

• brian-armstrong 9y ago
  Every time I think this, I end up going back later and wishing I had just done Cmake. If you just want to compile all the .c files it's easy enough to GLOB and make a couple targets, then come back and make it more sophisticated later
• everheardofc 9y ago
  Except with make most small setups are at least 20-40 lines of nontrivial code becaue you have to redo everything from scratch
  • slrz 9y ago
    include std.mk TARGET=foo HFILES=bar.h OFILES=main.o foo.o baz.o include cmd.mk This is what Makefiles tend to look like in some places.
• jcelerier 9y ago
  Is project(my_software CXX) add_library(my_lib foo.cpp bar.cpp) target_include_directories(my_lib PUBLIC include/lib) add_executable(my_app bluh.cpp) target_link_libraries(my_app my_lib) really more complicated than the equivalent makefile ? Especially given that: * this can generate ninja files instead of make * it adds the common targets such as make help, make clean, make install * dependency graphs can be generated with cmake --graphviz * solutions for various IDEs * etc...