[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