4 ms·
CMake is good enough for most purposes. Would it be better if its creators had gone with, say Lua, rather than their own DSL? Sure...and this may still happen [
by hgs3 4y ago
CMake is good enough for most purposes. Would it be better if its creators had gone with, say Lua, rather than their own DSL? Sure...and this may still happen [1].
Also, autotools does not require the GNU file structure if you pass "foreign" to AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE. In this case, all you need is your configure.ac and your Makefile.am's.
[1] https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/19863 https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/19863
- mathstuf 4y agoGiven CMake's compatibility guarantees and Lua's…lack of it, we'd have been stuck with Lua 4.x or something (or supporting every version of Lua since then at the same time…nobody's idea of "great" IMO). If CMake had chosen an existing language when it started, it'd likely have been Python 2.x, Perl 5, or Tcl. Not sure that any of these would have been strictly better decisions in today's world than the status quo. FD: CMake developer