Status of "Modern" linking and modules?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Status of "Modern" linking and modules?

Nicholas Devenish
I've been finding the 'modern' approaches of imported targets as used
by e.g. Boost and some other modules much better - being able to
specify all dependencies in a single target_link_libraries instead of
hauling around a whole load of required variables for each dependency.

However, only very few of the modules seem to have been altered to use
this paradigm - and some I'd have assumed were popular
(PythonInterp/PythonLibs - the libs themselves a dependency for
Boost::python) certainly aren't.

Is it just that nobody has gone over many of the existing packages, or
is there some reason this approach has been abandoned? This seems to
have been around for a couple of years, so I'd have expected more to
have of the module library converted.

Thanks,

Nick
--

Powered by www.kitware.com

Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ

Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit:

CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html
CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html
CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html

Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html

Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Status of "Modern" linking and modules?

Rolf Eike Beer
Am 2017-06-15 10:19, schrieb Nicholas Devenish:

> I've been finding the 'modern' approaches of imported targets as used
> by e.g. Boost and some other modules much better - being able to
> specify all dependencies in a single target_link_libraries instead of
> hauling around a whole load of required variables for each dependency.
>
> However, only very few of the modules seem to have been altered to use
> this paradigm - and some I'd have assumed were popular
> (PythonInterp/PythonLibs - the libs themselves a dependency for
> Boost::python) certainly aren't.
>
> Is it just that nobody has gone over many of the existing packages, or
> is there some reason this approach has been abandoned? This seems to
> have been around for a couple of years, so I'd have expected more to
> have of the module library converted.

It's just the former: patches welcome.

Greetings,

Eike
--

Powered by www.kitware.com

Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ

Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit:

CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html
CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html
CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html

Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html

Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Loading...