[CMake] CMake and Lua
Bill Hoffman
bill.hoffman at kitware.com
Wed Feb 27 17:37:01 EST 2008
Brandon Van Every wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Bill Hoffman <bill.hoffman at kitware.com> wrote:
>> Also, backwards compatibility is something we take very seriously. If
>> someone picks CMake as a build tool, we have to respect that choice and
>> try our best not to break that project. There are very large projects
>> that have many lines of CMake code in them. People have put a great
>> deal of effort into creating those files. If they don't have the time
>> to re-write in a new language, I don't blame them.
>
> This is why I think an automated translation tool, say from CMake
> script --> Lua, is essential to a migration strategy.
>
>> I also won't try to
>> force them to do it, by obsoleting the current language.
>
> I think if the automated translation tool had proven itself for a
> couple of years, it would be perfectly reasonable to force people to
> move on. So there is still that 2 year window of supporting 2
> languages.
>
>> So, we might have two official languages someday, but no more than that.
>
>
I have yet to see a auto-translate tool that works 100%. I do not
believe that they exist. I guess there is f2c, but I am sure there are
corner cases that fails on. To all using the current CMake language,
have no fear, it will be supported in the future.
-Bill
More information about the CMake
mailing list