[cmake-developers] Specifying VS target platform

[Patrick Gansterer]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:01:37 -0500, Brad King wrote:
> On 11/17/2012 05:14 PM, Patrick Gansterer wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 07:59:58 -0400, Brad King wrote:
>>> On 09/18/2012 02:23 AM, Patrick Gansterer wrote:
>>>> Maybe we can only change to current exact match of the generator
>>>> name to a "startsWith" and let the global generator class decide 
>>>> if
>>>> the generator name is valid?
>>>
>>> Yes, something like that in cmake::CreateGlobalGenerator will work.
>>> It will be nice to get rid of the platform-varied generator 
>>> classes.
>>
>> I found some time to work on this again. I only refectored the cmake 
>> in
>> a first step. If the commits at
>> https://gitorious.org/~paroga/cmake/parogas-cmake/commits/factory or 
>> a
>> similar solution gets merged, I'll refector the Visual Studio 
>> Generators
>> and then add support for the WinCE platform.
>
> Wonderful, thanks for working on this!
>
> The approach in your topic looks good.  There are a few style 
> concerns
> though:
>
> - Please add documentation to cmGlobalGeneratorFactory, or at least
>   in the commit message that adds it, explaining its purpose.

Didn't wanted to put to much work into "documentation" in a first step, 
but since it seams fine to you, I'll extend the incode documentation and 
all commit messages.

> - Please limit C++ source code to 79 columns or fewer.  The output of
>
>    git log origin/master.. --pickaxe-regex -S'.{80}' -- Source
>
>   should be empty when HEAD is your topic.

OK, interessing, seams that I missed a few places when checking the 
line lenghts. :-/

> - If some of the ancient compilers we support can't handle the 
> template
>   specializations I'll have to revert it and come back to you for an
>   alternative.

Cool. If I get some infos about the templat problems, I'll fix them.

> After this the next commit should drop the architecture-specific
> generator classes in favor of the new approach.  That will 
> demonstrate
> that this refactoring is worthwhile even with no new features such as
> WinCE support.

That's exactly my plan. :-)

-- Patrick