3 ms·
I don't know how you can think CMake is worse than autoconf. At least it has a declarative approach with good mechanisms for reusing common logic. Its much easi
by jeremyjh 3y ago
I don't know how you can think CMake is worse than autoconf. At least it has a declarative approach with good mechanisms for reusing common logic. Its much easier for IDEs/editors to work with it.
- jonstewart 3y agoI don't think it's worse, per se, but I hate it/myself _more_ when I contemplate switching from autotools to cmake -- it's like upgrading from CP/M to DOS, when what I'd like to have is a Mac. And as much as autotools blows, every time I try to build some project that uses cmake I inevitably go through some rigmarole making a build directory (not that out-of-source tree builds aren't the right thing, they are, but why make me create one?) and finding some obscure set of -D options to get the sucker to build on my system. configure && make still has cmake beat from a user's perspective.
- jeremyjh 3y agoYeah it’s not intended to be used directly for end user builds. Its ultimate product is a set of makefiles (or Visual Studio project files) and the developer should distribute those.