-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Robert Ramey Sent: 23 April 2016 19:10 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] CMake - one more time
<snip>
The idea is that the user would set this(not the library author), so it shouldn’t be set in a CMakeLists.txt file.
This statement is not about the particular CMake variable. It's about the fact that the "language" has many, many builtin ambiguities which make it impossible to know or agree on how to use it.
Yes, but cmake has a much larger community that after a little googling I can find a solution to the problem due to the fact that there is a wealth of examples and tutorials out there.
Yes - and you can find a whole pile of b2/bjam queries and replies on lots of sites too. And very many of them are quite basic questions that should not need to be asked on the helpful sites.
Ahhh yes. That's the real problem. What you characterize as a solution/feather, I characterize as a symptom of fundamental fault. Do have have to troll the whole net to differentiate a function? Of course not. That fact that this is now an acceptable answer is testament to the sad state of modern software development!
Absolutely! (And sadly I must also include C/C++ in this - the world's greatest software disaster, but let's not digress...)
And the documentation actually makes it worse because it suggests that the system is simple to use when it's actually not. It makes naive users feel like they're stupid - whether they are or not.
At least I know I'm stupid - but I still want to get things to work.
And this is made worse by the fact that there are lots of people who have made simple build scripts for small projects with limited requirements. This work the first time - now they think it IS easy and they think there's nothing to it. It's depressing.
I don’t know what you are referring to here.
Many of the answers on the helpful sites.
LOL - I'm referring to discussions such as this one. The fact that everytime a question is raised, someone has an answer for some specific scenario. This is deemed to be support that the system is a good one. This the exact wrong conclusion! It seems that it never occurs to anyone that the fact that such a question has to be ask in the first place is an indicator that something is fundamentally wrong with the concept and/or implementation.
+1 Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830